Why So Many Sudden Sexual Harrassment Cases? It's The Law!

[forkup]

The Billy Bush tape wasn't the only time Trump got caught on tape.

If you are for the defense of woman first and foremost how do you vote for Trump?
I don't have to rely on mere accusations I can simply listen to him and then hear woman confirm he actually did as he described. How do you mesh defending woman while protecting Trump?

I did not vote for Trump i live in France...I do not think it's a choir boy, I agree with you. I think he will also have problems like the others. but I am a Republican , I could never be an leftist impossible.

Ok so when you say I'm for the defense of woman first and foremost you are actually meaning unless the opponent is a leftist in which case my political affiliation takes precedence? I'm Belgian myself just to put it out there, my wife is American though.

Not at all, when the primary to start usa I wanted Jeb Bush or another wins but it is * trump who win and I learned to know his way of being, his franchise and his slogan America First I like. after what he did or not, I do not know. I am like you I think a man should appreciate a woman for what she is above all but not for her look. all this is superficial in my opinion.

Sure, I just wanted to point out that the media's coverage on his treatment of woman wasn't a conspiracy. Not claiming there wasn't any bias but Trump's questionable behavior towards woman is well documented. And the fact that you were claiming fake news while at the same time talking about defending woman first and foremost seemed to clash terribly with those facts. I don't think because you are Republican you are bad and I'm perfectly aware there's enough hypocrisy to go around. I've been talking about these harassment cases coming out of the woodwork with my wife and I've noticed that it's not even as straightforward as you might think between like minded people. But in the case of people trying to get elected for public office credible accusations as the ones towards Trump and Moore should immediately disqualify them for office and the fact that it doesn't appear to do so seriously makes me question the morals of people who vote for them, or in the case of this board protect or excuse them.

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

 

[forkup]

Men should above all respect women and not see women as a sexual object.

And therein lies the problem; so many women ACT like sex objects and try to be seen that way! Lady Adult Film Stars, Striptease dancers, models, call girls and many others. What is first and foremost on most women's minds? Dressing up and putting on make-up, etc., staying slim, so when they go out, heads will turn. To attract men, control men, they promote sexuality. Just the other day I saw two stories where one LA Celebrity was torqued because someone hacked her cellphone and stole the nude pictures of herself on it and put them on the web! Another story was about Madonna as a young girl and pictures just released of a photo-shoot she did in a studio where she pranced around butt-naked and showed EVERYTHING.

So women have worked hard to be seen as sex objects and are not entirely innocent if a few guys can't handle it and TREAT them like sex objects. The other half is that sex sells and advertising has long took advantage of girls and sex for the sake of profit, and this includes the movie industry. LA and Hollywood have long been a sex shop where everyone knew that for a girl to make her way, sooner or later, someone would try to take advantage of her! And forget not advertising of a generation ago; have we forgotten how the industry use to blatantly see and treat women? Here are a few examples:

View attachment 162089
View attachment 162090
View attachment 162091
View attachment 162092
View attachment 162093

And these are not even the worst.

So how can anyone be surprised at the Harvey Weinsteins of the world? It was never unknown what he did, merely left unspoken. In many ways, society CREATED Weinstein and those like him, at least Hollywood did. Women were vulnerable, they were abused, they went into a situation many times in movies, etc., where they knew they might be taken advantage of, and went along with certain things as a "necessary evil" for getting a leg up (as it were) in the industry, and far too many in LA were more than happy to go along with it, exploit it for themselves or at least look the other way. No so anymore.

Hollywood and Lala Land have taken a huge upset literally overnight and they will never operate the same again.

But when Republican politicians are implicated the press needs to be 100 percent sure they are right? That's seems to be the premise of this OP?

 

[toobfreak]

Your posters are surprising, I did not know about this really degrading mentality towards women.

There are far worse, ones I wouldn't even show here. But here are a few more from between the 40's and 70's------ there's a common theme of sexism (and racism towards blacks in others) that was commonplace and broadly accepted because it put men at the center of the universe and men controlled advertising. Women were mere objects of possession, and a woman knew her only option was inside the house to obey and serve her husband, keep him happy, and outside the home, to exploit her looks and body. It was a not-so-subtle form of SLAVERY! Is it any wonder that many women live single lives today when a lot of men are plain assholes?

It has been a slow process of change; it is one thing to call women equals, quite another to actually treat them that way. The trick was to keep telling women they were less than a man; tell a person something often enough, they will believe it. These ads are more than insulting, they are degrading seen today. But realize that in their time, this is how it was. Women had few options outside the home, very limited career opportunities, most of those based on exploiting her body, so most of the time, you really depended on a man to marry you and put a roof over your head. When these ads were new, neither man nor woman saw these much as degrading, just that this was the way it was.

Every single one of these was printed in magazines without so much as an eye batted. So, many women have no idea how far they've really come. Ironically, it was men who little by little saw the need for change and pushed along with women to achieve it. But we are living a lie in vilifying Harvey Weinstein; those like him were merely the embodiment of an idea that goes back a long, long time. Harvey was merely still living in that bubble he grew up in that told him his attitudes and actions were both normal and acceptable, and so many women never complained until now because they knew that too, and that until now, they hadn't the voice nor audience to hear them much less take their side.

 

[Dalia]

I did not vote for Trump i live in France...I do not think it's a choir boy, I agree with you. I think he will also have problems like the others. but I am a Republican , I could never be an leftist impossible.

Ok so when you say I'm for the defense of woman first and foremost you are actually meaning unless the opponent is a leftist in which case my political affiliation takes precedence? I'm Belgian myself just to put it out there, my wife is American though.

Not at all, when the primary to start usa I wanted Jeb Bush or another wins but it is * trump who win and I learned to know his way of being, his franchise and his slogan America First I like. after what he did or not, I do not know. I am like you I think a man should appreciate a woman for what she is above all but not for her look. all this is superficial in my opinion.

Sure, I just wanted to point out that the media's coverage on his treatment of woman wasn't a conspiracy. Not claiming there wasn't any bias but Trump's questionable behavior towards woman is well documented. And the fact that you were claiming fake news while at the same time talking about defending woman first and foremost seemed to clash terribly with those facts. I don't think because you are Republican you are bad and I'm perfectly aware there's enough hypocrisy to go around. I've been talking about these harassment cases coming out of the woodwork with my wife and I've noticed that it's not even as straightforward as you might think between like minded people. But in the case of people trying to get elected for public office credible accusations as the ones towards Trump and Moore should immediately disqualify them for office and the fact that it doesn't appear to do so seriously makes me question the morals of people who vote for them, or in the case of this board protect or excuse them.

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

 

[forkup]

Ok so when you say I'm for the defense of woman first and foremost you are actually meaning unless the opponent is a leftist in which case my political affiliation takes precedence? I'm Belgian myself just to put it out there, my wife is American though.

Not at all, when the primary to start usa I wanted Jeb Bush or another wins but it is * trump who win and I learned to know his way of being, his franchise and his slogan America First I like. after what he did or not, I do not know. I am like you I think a man should appreciate a woman for what she is above all but not for her look. all this is superficial in my opinion.

Sure, I just wanted to point out that the media's coverage on his treatment of woman wasn't a conspiracy. Not claiming there wasn't any bias but Trump's questionable behavior towards woman is well documented. And the fact that you were claiming fake news while at the same time talking about defending woman first and foremost seemed to clash terribly with those facts. I don't think because you are Republican you are bad and I'm perfectly aware there's enough hypocrisy to go around. I've been talking about these harassment cases coming out of the woodwork with my wife and I've noticed that it's not even as straightforward as you might think between like minded people. But in the case of people trying to get elected for public office credible accusations as the ones towards Trump and Moore should immediately disqualify them for office and the fact that it doesn't appear to do so seriously makes me question the morals of people who vote for them, or in the case of this board protect or excuse them.

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

 

[Dalia]

Your posters are surprising, I did not know about this really degrading mentality towards women.

There are far worse, ones I wouldn't even show here. But here are a few more from between the 40's and 70's------ there's a common theme of sexism (and racism towards blacks in others) that was commonplace and broadly accepted because it put men at the center of the universe and men controlled advertising. Women were mere objects of possession, and a woman knew her only option was inside the house to obey and serve her husband, keep him happy, and outside the home, to exploit her looks and body. It was a not-so-subtle form of SLAVERY! Is it any wonder that many women live single lives today when a lot of men are plain assholes?

It has been a slow process of change; it is one thing to call women equals, quite another to actually treat them that way. The trick was to keep telling women they were less than a man; tell a person something often enough, they will believe it. These ads are more than insulting, they are degrading seen today. But realize that in their time, this is how it was. Women had few options outside the home, very limited career opportunities, most of those based on exploiting her body, so most of the time, you really depended on a man to marry you and put a roof over your head. When these ads were new, neither man nor woman saw these much as degrading, just that this was the way it was.

View attachment 162183 View attachment 162184 View attachment 162185 View attachment 162186 View attachment 162187 View attachment 162189 View attachment 162190 View attachment 162191 View attachment 162192 View attachment 162193 View attachment 162194 View attachment 162195


Every single one of these was printed in magazines without so much as an eye batted. So, many women have no idea how far they've really come. Ironically, it was men who little by little saw the need for change and pushed along with women to achieve it. But we are living a lie in vilifying Harvey Weinstein; those like him were merely the embodiment of an idea that goes back a long, long time. Harvey was merely still living in that bubble he grew up in that told him his attitudes and actions were both normal and acceptable, and so many women never complained until now because they knew that too, and that until now, they hadn't the voice nor audience to hear them much less take their side.

It's disgusting, almost like a caveman's time ... a well-grounded mentality and all of this men who are rightly acclaimed believed they had no tragedy to treat a woman as a less than nothing. and the men of power have benefited from it, especially in the cinema world, but not just there.
DSK our French abuser has been accused by several women but he is still doing well.

 

[Dalia]

Not at all, when the primary to start usa I wanted Jeb Bush or another wins but it is * trump who win and I learned to know his way of being, his franchise and his slogan America First I like. after what he did or not, I do not know. I am like you I think a man should appreciate a woman for what she is above all but not for her look. all this is superficial in my opinion.

Sure, I just wanted to point out that the media's coverage on his treatment of woman wasn't a conspiracy. Not claiming there wasn't any bias but Trump's questionable behavior towards woman is well documented. And the fact that you were claiming fake news while at the same time talking about defending woman first and foremost seemed to clash terribly with those facts. I don't think because you are Republican you are bad and I'm perfectly aware there's enough hypocrisy to go around. I've been talking about these harassment cases coming out of the woodwork with my wife and I've noticed that it's not even as straightforward as you might think between like minded people. But in the case of people trying to get elected for public office credible accusations as the ones towards Trump and Moore should immediately disqualify them for office and the fact that it doesn't appear to do so seriously makes me question the morals of people who vote for them, or in the case of this board protect or excuse them.

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

 

[forkup]

Sure, I just wanted to point out that the media's coverage on his treatment of woman wasn't a conspiracy. Not claiming there wasn't any bias but Trump's questionable behavior towards woman is well documented. And the fact that you were claiming fake news while at the same time talking about defending woman first and foremost seemed to clash terribly with those facts. I don't think because you are Republican you are bad and I'm perfectly aware there's enough hypocrisy to go around. I've been talking about these harassment cases coming out of the woodwork with my wife and I've noticed that it's not even as straightforward as you might think between like minded people. But in the case of people trying to get elected for public office credible accusations as the ones towards Trump and Moore should immediately disqualify them for office and the fact that it doesn't appear to do so seriously makes me question the morals of people who vote for them, or in the case of this board protect or excuse them.

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

 

[Dalia]

I'm not excusing anything, but I say that coincidentally during the CNN primaries had repeatedly shown Trump's record and that he had the stories of Hillary's e-mails but that they did not mention them .
Since the election of Trump it did not stop News against him. Why as magic all this women come to declare their abuse? they could have done during Obama's term?

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

That's not what I think or I say ... Trump is a rich and powerful man even before being elected President Women could have come before to say that he was not acting properly? The same thing happens to DSK during the French primaries that's what I try to make you understand the timing.

 

[forkup]

Why should it matter when they came out, if you don't doubt that he did harass woman? That's the part of your argument I don't get. On the one hand you concede he was a creep and on the other hand you seem to want to cast doubt that he was a creep. And CNN did cover the e-mails extensively by the way. Let me put it this way, would you vote for ANY French politician who was caught saying he walks into girls dressing rooms, or one who seeks out teens as young as 14 for sexual relations? Does political affiliation play any role in that equation?

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

That's not what I think or I say ... Trump is a rich and powerful man even before being elected President Women could have come before to say that he was not acting properly? The same thing happens to DSK during the French primaries that's what I try to make you understand the timing.

I just don't get why you find the timing important if you don't doubt at least some of the claims.

 

[Dalia]

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

That's not what I think or I say ... Trump is a rich and powerful man even before being elected President Women could have come before to say that he was not acting properly? The same thing happens to DSK during the French primaries that's what I try to make you understand the timing.

I just don't get why you find the timing important if you don't doubt at least some of the claims.

But the timing is important ... DSK is that it's a pig for sure but the bomb to fall just before he was safe and sure to be president of France.

 

[forkup]

Lol CNN did talk about it,you obviously didn't watch CNN. Anyways as I said I showed, and you conceded that Trump did walk into dressing rooms of beauty peagents something that in the interview was considered inappropriate to say the least by those in those dressing rooms.I purposely didn't use the Billy Bush tape so you wouldn't have the opportunity to use the arguments you are using now. The fact that the timing was fortuitous doesn't change the truth of those allegations. So again why are you still trying to question the other people?

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

That's not what I think or I say ... Trump is a rich and powerful man even before being elected President Women could have come before to say that he was not acting properly? The same thing happens to DSK during the French primaries that's what I try to make you understand the timing.

I just don't get why you find the timing important if you don't doubt at least some of the claims.

But the timing is important ... DSK is that it's a pig for sure but the bomb to fall just before he was safe and sure to be president of France.

Even if he'd become president he'd still be a pig. If you really find defending woman the most important, then you should be glad he was found out. I don't see how the timing changes that.

 

[Dalia]

I refer you the same way why you do not answer.
At the timing of this women, I already told you that I agreed with you for the video

So woman should not speak up when the perpetrator is running for public office? This is of course also the answer to your question. When anyone runs for president, everything he did becomes newsworthy, so anything he did in his past that is inappropriate will be likely found out. It says nothing of it's truthfulness. I find it both a predictable and pretty disgusting argument to question not the truth of the claims but its timing. Like that makes it any more acceptable.

That's not what I think or I say ... Trump is a rich and powerful man even before being elected President Women could have come before to say that he was not acting properly? The same thing happens to DSK during the French primaries that's what I try to make you understand the timing.

I just don't get why you find the timing important if you don't doubt at least some of the claims.

But the timing is important ... DSK is that it's a pig for sure but the bomb to fall just before he was safe and sure to be president of France.

Even if he'd become president he'd still be a pig. If you really find defending woman the most important, then you should be glad he was found out. I don't see how the timing changes that.

Oui, he is a pig, all man should respect woman first of all and there are the one who should defend a woman like they will defend their mothers.

 

[OnePercenter]

The laws between the USA and other countries like Britain are diametrically opposite. Elsewhere, when you accuse someone of something, you have the burden of proof. In the USA, our media are protected and once accused, the burden is on you to prove them wrong (which the law makes difficult and expensive).

Why so many sexual harassment cases in US, not UK?

Sorry to tell you but Since Weinstein there have been several high profile media personas accused in my country Belgium so no, it's not unique to the US. It seems to be a genuine case of woman feeling they can now more freely talk about instances of harassment. How r/belgium and the media are covering the Bart de Pauw events • r/belgium
I also want to point out that in most cases the satisfaction of bringing the story out is the only type of compensation the victims get. Do you prefer them to be quiet?

Accuse away. But those accusations must be investigated fully. And if the allegations are false, charge the accuser and put them in jail as they do in Britain.

Accusations can ruin lives as we just witnessed here in "A Rape on Campus". It was a total lie and Rolling Stone magazine and the writer are being seriously punished financially>

But the woman who made up everything is getting off scot free. She should have been prosecuted and jailed.

The insurance company is the payee. The accuser has no money.

It's all about the pay day.

 

[toobfreak]

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Trump may be boorish, rude, blunt, crass, egotistical, womanizing, and irritating at times but keep in mind that wishing for Trump's defeat is a call for Hillary to have won. To date, best as I know, none of the claims against Trump have ever been proven; his one thing, that video from long ago was not only very long ago, but was a private conversation where he admitted that female beauty contestants often threw themselves at him and other pageant leaders and were willing to do "anything" in order to win the contest, so the ladies were complicit, not forced.

Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office, mad with lust for power, and with a long history of well-defended crimes and even treasonous actions; anything that brought her more wealth and power. In the '90's, up to 97 deaths and "suicides" were linked to the Clintons. Better we put a donkey in power rather than Hillary Clinton! I understand the desire to see a woman in office, but just as with Barrack, too many never looked past his skin color as with Hillary's sex, to see that neither were fit for office. No one article is capable of covering Hillary's crimes--- ---for that, you'd need an encyclopedia.

Why Trump's Not So Bad

 

[Dalia]

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Trump may be boorish, rude, blunt, crass, egotistical, womanizing, and irritating at times but keep in mind that wishing for Trump's defeat is a call for Hillary to have won. To date, best as I know, none of the claims against Trump have ever been proven; his one thing, that video from long ago was not only very long ago, but was a private conversation where he admitted that female beauty contestants often threw themselves at him and other pageant leaders and were willing to do "anything" in order to win the contest, so the ladies were complicit, not forced.

Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office, mad with lust for power, and with a long history of well-defended crimes and even treasonous actions; anything that brought her more wealth and power. In the '90's, up to 97 deaths and "suicides" were linked to the Clintons. Better we put a donkey in power rather than Hillary Clinton! I understand the desire to see a woman in office, but just as with Barrack, too many never looked past his skin color as with Hillary's sex, to see that neither were fit for office. No one article is capable of covering Hillary's crimes--- ---for that, you'd need an encyclopedia.

Why Trump's Not So Bad

But I agree with you, Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office. imagine for a moment if she would have been elected she wanted to open doors wide open to migrants as we have lived in Europe. and we were massacred by terrorist disguised as migrants
And after the damage caused by Obama. it's the liberation for you

 

[toobfreak]

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Trump may be boorish, rude, blunt, crass, egotistical, womanizing, and irritating at times but keep in mind that wishing for Trump's defeat is a call for Hillary to have won. To date, best as I know, none of the claims against Trump have ever been proven; his one thing, that video from long ago was not only very long ago, but was a private conversation where he admitted that female beauty contestants often threw themselves at him and other pageant leaders and were willing to do "anything" in order to win the contest, so the ladies were complicit, not forced.

Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office, mad with lust for power, and with a long history of well-defended crimes and even treasonous actions; anything that brought her more wealth and power. In the '90's, up to 97 deaths and "suicides" were linked to the Clintons. Better we put a donkey in power rather than Hillary Clinton! I understand the desire to see a woman in office, but just as with Barrack, too many never looked past his skin color as with Hillary's sex, to see that neither were fit for office. No one article is capable of covering Hillary's crimes--- ---for that, you'd need an encyclopedia.

Why Trump's Not So Bad

But I agree with you, Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office. imagine for a moment if she would have been elected she wanted to open doors wide open to migrants as we have lived in Europe. and we were massacred by terrorist disguised as migrants
And after the damage caused by Obama. it's the liberation for you

I would only add that it just occurred to me that Trump's video from 12-15 years ago that so much has been made of, accusing him of assaulting women, dug up by some oppo group looking to derail his campaign, we have only his word on this, and considering this was being talked about privately and to some other guy he knew en route to a pageant, for all we know, this was just typical male bravado, Trump trying to impress the guy with tall stories or maybe his own male fantasy. For all we know, these things never really happened.

 

[Dalia]

What bothers me most is that all this women came to say during the primary, I find it strange that they did not come before. one must admit that the timing was ideal to try make Trump lose the election.
CNN did not talk about emails so much they showed they were for Hillary

Trump may be boorish, rude, blunt, crass, egotistical, womanizing, and irritating at times but keep in mind that wishing for Trump's defeat is a call for Hillary to have won. To date, best as I know, none of the claims against Trump have ever been proven; his one thing, that video from long ago was not only very long ago, but was a private conversation where he admitted that female beauty contestants often threw themselves at him and other pageant leaders and were willing to do "anything" in order to win the contest, so the ladies were complicit, not forced.

Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office, mad with lust for power, and with a long history of well-defended crimes and even treasonous actions; anything that brought her more wealth and power. In the '90's, up to 97 deaths and "suicides" were linked to the Clintons. Better we put a donkey in power rather than Hillary Clinton! I understand the desire to see a woman in office, but just as with Barrack, too many never looked past his skin color as with Hillary's sex, to see that neither were fit for office. No one article is capable of covering Hillary's crimes--- ---for that, you'd need an encyclopedia.

Why Trump's Not So Bad

But I agree with you, Hillary has been shown to be one of the most evil and corrupt people ever to run for office. imagine for a moment if she would have been elected she wanted to open doors wide open to migrants as we have lived in Europe. and we were massacred by terrorist disguised as migrants
And after the damage caused by Obama. it's the liberation for you

I would only add that it just occurred to me that Trump's video from 12-15 years ago that so much has been made of, accusing him of assaulting women, dug up by some oppo group looking to derail his campaign, we have only his word on this, and considering this was being talked about privately and to some other guy he knew en route to a pageant, for all we know, this was just typical male bravado, Trump trying to impress the guy with tall stories or maybe his own male fantasy. For all we know, these things never really happened.

Possible, Trump like women, maybe it's bothering the leftists that is not gay?
The media have hit him since the primaries nobody should be surprised that he hate them as much and he prefers twitter.

 

[OldLady]

The laws between the USA and other countries like Britain are diametrically opposite. Elsewhere, when you accuse someone of something, you have the burden of proof. In the USA, our media are protected and once accused, the burden is on you to prove them wrong (which the law makes difficult and expensive).

Why so many sexual harassment cases in US, not UK?

I have no problem about keeping accusations private until they are adjudicated. Report the outcome AND the allegations all at once. This is nuts right now.
On the other hand, would you want to know if someone had behaved unethically/immorally, even if the statute had run? Because someone can't be criminally charged, should the information never be given to the voters?
Not so sure what's the best thing. It does feel somewhat like a circus at the moment.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Here in the untied states you're guilty until you prove to be innocent. Not right....

Meaning someone can destroy you just because they hate you or you're standing in their way.

Dyslexics of the world, UNTIE!