320 Years of History
Gold Member
Okay...It seems some "talking heads" on both sides of the aisle take exception to some extent with Donald Trump tweeting. I have to wonder. Do they have an issue with his tweeting, or do they dislike that his tweets are generally inflammatory and off-message? I for one could not care less about whether Trump says what he feels he must say via a tweet or any other medium. The issue I have is with what Trump thinks, not how he chooses to express his thoughts.
Take his Access Hollywood remarks. People keep talking about the vulgarity of his language in the video. Well, the words are what they are and mean what they mean (connotatively and denotatively). The issue in my mind isn't the words themselves or necessarily that he used them, even though I recognize society in general has a notion of some words being "polite" and some not. The issue for me is that to use those words in the manner he did -- the tone, tenor and situation -- must necessarily, as with all words anyone uses in any circumstance, be an expression of thoughts and attitudes the man held in 2005, and his actions over the course of the years between then and now don't suggest that his thoughts and attitudes have changed.
Now, had he tweeted essentially the same ideas rather than having them come out via a videotape, that would not alter the fact that the words express the man's beliefs. Could the man have chosen "polite" terms to express his thoughts instead of the ones he did use? Sure, but were he to have done, the meaning would have been no different; all that would have been different is that some news organizations would not have had to expurgate bits of the audio. Accordingly, there's no reason to have a materially different opinion about them or their speaker.
For example, the problem isn't that he said "p*ssy." The problem is that the man thinks that because he's a star, he believes that whatever physical contact he chooses to make with a woman is okay and welcomed, regardless of whether the woman has expressly told him it is okay. I don't care whether he tweets that idea or expresses it at a rally, bachelor party or business meeting. I don't care if he expresses it privately or publicly. The fact remains that the man thinks it, and he thinks it all the time no matter whether he directly tells us so or doesn't. The fact remains that prior to our hearing him express his attitude about the nature of interaction he is free to take with women, there was at least plausible deniability as to whether he truly was sexist/misogynist. After hearing those remarks and observing his subsequent behavior over the past decade, the element of doubt no longer exists.
Now one can try to discount the severity of the fact that the man made the remarks he did in that video. On can call it "locker room" talk. Well, that's a non-starter as far as I'm concerned. Sure, teenage boys may make remarks of that nature in the locker room. Why, among other reasons, might they do so? Well, because they've been taught (tacitly if no other way) that it's an appropriate, or at least acceptable to think of women and their actions toward them that way. But then, one hopes, those boys grow up and become gentlemen and they realise their thinking needs a "course correction" and they alter their attitudes. Trump is not a teenager nor was he in 2005.
Have I heard similar out of line remarks in locker rooms and made by other adult males? Yes. That I have, and that those men have those attitudes does not make having them be right. That they have those beliefs does not exculpate them or others from their moral depravity toward women. It merely means that Trump isn't the only debauched man one might find. That is not a good thing.
Take his Access Hollywood remarks. People keep talking about the vulgarity of his language in the video. Well, the words are what they are and mean what they mean (connotatively and denotatively). The issue in my mind isn't the words themselves or necessarily that he used them, even though I recognize society in general has a notion of some words being "polite" and some not. The issue for me is that to use those words in the manner he did -- the tone, tenor and situation -- must necessarily, as with all words anyone uses in any circumstance, be an expression of thoughts and attitudes the man held in 2005, and his actions over the course of the years between then and now don't suggest that his thoughts and attitudes have changed.
Now, had he tweeted essentially the same ideas rather than having them come out via a videotape, that would not alter the fact that the words express the man's beliefs. Could the man have chosen "polite" terms to express his thoughts instead of the ones he did use? Sure, but were he to have done, the meaning would have been no different; all that would have been different is that some news organizations would not have had to expurgate bits of the audio. Accordingly, there's no reason to have a materially different opinion about them or their speaker.
For example, the problem isn't that he said "p*ssy." The problem is that the man thinks that because he's a star, he believes that whatever physical contact he chooses to make with a woman is okay and welcomed, regardless of whether the woman has expressly told him it is okay. I don't care whether he tweets that idea or expresses it at a rally, bachelor party or business meeting. I don't care if he expresses it privately or publicly. The fact remains that the man thinks it, and he thinks it all the time no matter whether he directly tells us so or doesn't. The fact remains that prior to our hearing him express his attitude about the nature of interaction he is free to take with women, there was at least plausible deniability as to whether he truly was sexist/misogynist. After hearing those remarks and observing his subsequent behavior over the past decade, the element of doubt no longer exists.
Now one can try to discount the severity of the fact that the man made the remarks he did in that video. On can call it "locker room" talk. Well, that's a non-starter as far as I'm concerned. Sure, teenage boys may make remarks of that nature in the locker room. Why, among other reasons, might they do so? Well, because they've been taught (tacitly if no other way) that it's an appropriate, or at least acceptable to think of women and their actions toward them that way. But then, one hopes, those boys grow up and become gentlemen and they realise their thinking needs a "course correction" and they alter their attitudes. Trump is not a teenager nor was he in 2005.
Have I heard similar out of line remarks in locker rooms and made by other adult males? Yes. That I have, and that those men have those attitudes does not make having them be right. That they have those beliefs does not exculpate them or others from their moral depravity toward women. It merely means that Trump isn't the only debauched man one might find. That is not a good thing.
Last edited:
