As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[SCOTUS] Kavanaugh Expresses Regret For Real Victim: Brett Kavanaugh

24567100

Posts

  • CururuCururu Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Edit: I just saw the mod post at the same time as this, so I'll delete it. Ignore Me!

    Cururu on
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Strong essay by Caitlin Flanagan. Who is a strong critic of #MeToo, interestingly.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • daveNYCdaveNYC Why universe hate Waspinator? Registered User regular
    Grassley says there will only be the two witnesses, so we remain not actually interested in the truth. Could call Mark Judge to testify, Ford's therapist, etc.

    I sure as hell wouldn't want to give the Republican senators the ability to ask my therapist questions while under oath.

    Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
  • CururuCururu Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Yeah, forcing a therapist to testify under oath seems like a bad thing to allow, in general. It would probably just be a lot of "I'm sorry, that is privileged information" type answers anyway.

    Cururu on
  • SelnerSelner Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Grassley says there will only be the two witnesses, so we remain not actually interested in the truth. Could call Mark Judge to testify, Ford's therapist, etc.

    I sure as hell wouldn't want to give the Republican senators the ability to ask my therapist questions while under oath.

    Can they request the notes be entered into the record or anything like that? I agree, there's no reason to put the therapist up for interviewing. Just have them formally certify the notes, or whatever it's called.

  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    Jesus Christ. Judicial Crisis Network person says that if the allegations are true, the behavior she described could just be rough horseplay.

    TPM editor:

  • So It GoesSo It Goes We keep moving...Registered User regular
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Grassley says there will only be the two witnesses, so we remain not actually interested in the truth. Could call Mark Judge to testify, Ford's therapist, etc.

    I sure as hell wouldn't want to give the Republican senators the ability to ask my therapist questions while under oath.

    Yeah hell naw.

    Could call other friends that she told about the event in the past.

    Love that we're going to have a rape trial with no rules of evidence in front of the most partial judges possible live on national TV.

    If you doubt Christine Ford is a strong person, idk what to tell you. She's about to go through hell.

  • ShivahnShivahn Unaware of her barrel shifter privilege Western coastal temptressRegistered User, Moderator mod
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

  • SleepSleep Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    It's gonna be a pretty gross process to watch really considering that for the pubs the entire thing is theater of giving a shit while they take kavanaugh at his word, shit all over ford in the grossest ways possible, and stick to the 5-4 supreme court plan in the end.

    Sleep on
  • ChiselphaneChiselphane Registered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    i was gonna say

    kavanaugh is wildly unpopular

    red state dems are being really dumb if they decide to die on this hill

    X wouldnt actually do incredibly dumb thing Y is not a safe bet anymore.

  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

    We live in a culture where consent is basically ignored as a principle.

    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Sleep wrote: »
    It's gonna be a pretty gross process to watch really considering that for the pubs the entire thing is theater of giving a shit while they take kavanaugh at his word, shit all over ford in the grossest ways possible, and stick to the 5-4 supreme court plan in the end.

    A fairly large portion are perfectly fine with the allegations bring true, this is just to build up plausable deniability and to threaten any other victims with media exposure and being gaslighted by a bunch of creepy old men in front of a crowd.

  • shrykeshryke Member of the Beast Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

    The extent to which "Well, she got in the car/room/etc with me so she wants it, even if she fights back" is somehow a common way of thinking continues to baffle and disturb me.

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    shryke wrote: »
    Shivahn wrote: »
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

    The extent to which "Well, she got in the car/room/etc with me so she wants it, even if she fights back" is somehow a common way of thinking continues to baffle and disturb me.

    "She was in public without a male relative escort".

  • MazzyxMazzyx Comedy Gold Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

    We live in a culture where consent is basically ignored as a principle.

    Consent seems simple but it is very complex. And it is something that needs to be taught, by middle school, to really sink in. But that could be a whole thread.

    But overall nothing in this story screams as there was a chance for consent and a pull back when it was obviously not given. But the same excuses are used over and over to defend perpetrators and this is a common one. They totally consented it was just horseplay! They consented initially but took it back, I thought it was just part of some role play. Shit like that. This is a common smear campaign to discredit a victim. We have seen this before from the same people.

    u7stthr17eud.png
  • joshofalltradesjoshofalltrades Class Traitor Smoke-filled roomRegistered User regular
    Horseplay?

    What?

    Why don’t you get held down with hands over your mouth so you can’t scream and people turning up loud music so people can’t even hear your muffled noises as they try to get your pants off to penetrate you without your consent and tell me that’s goddamn “horseplay”.

    Ass.

  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    Jesus jumped up Christ. That reminds me of Mitt Romney describing going around and cutting the hair of people he bullied in school as "haha just a prank~" when looking back on it in hindsight. I don't think older white republican dudes know what anything is.

    And I thought Kavanaugh was denying this shit? Now he's trying to say it was something else? HE'S A FUCKING LIAR PLEASE CANCEL HIM.

  • kaidkaid Registered User regular
    So It Goes wrote: »
    daveNYC wrote: »
    Grassley says there will only be the two witnesses, so we remain not actually interested in the truth. Could call Mark Judge to testify, Ford's therapist, etc.

    I sure as hell wouldn't want to give the Republican senators the ability to ask my therapist questions while under oath.

    Yeah hell naw.

    Could call other friends that she told about the event in the past.

    Love that we're going to have a rape trial with no rules of evidence in front of the most partial judges possible live on national TV.

    If you doubt Christine Ford is a strong person, idk what to tell you. She's about to go through hell.

    The fact she pretty much knew what would happen if she became known to be the accuser and did it anyway speaks loudly that she is in fact telling the truth. I don't see anybody willingly putting their life and family in a blender if its not true.

  • ButtersButters A glass of some milks Registered User regular
    "locker room talk" worked with the relevant constituency so yeah why not give "horseplay" a shot. Can't wait till Don Jr sucker punches someone at a Crossfit club and calls it "roughhousing"

    PSN: idontworkhere582 | CFN: idontworkhere | Steam: lordbutters | Amazon Wishlist
  • BrodyBrody The Watch The First ShoreRegistered User regular
    Henroid wrote: »
    Jesus jumped up Christ. That reminds me of Mitt Romney describing going around and cutting the hair of people he bullied in school as "haha just a prank~" when looking back on it in hindsight. I don't think older white republican dudes know what anything is.

    And I thought Kavanaugh was denying this shit? Now he's trying to say it was something else? HE'S A FUCKING LIAR PLEASE CANCEL HIM.

    Kavanaugh is still denying it, someone else suggested that maybe Kavanaugh had been attempting horseplay. Which I'm pretty sure is also illegal in most states.

    "I will write your name in the ruin of them. I will paint you across history in the color of their blood."

    The Monster Baru Cormorant - Seth Dickinson

    Steam: Korvalain
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    It remains fascinating that like none of the Kavanaugh defenders except Kavanaugh are even pretending nothing happened.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • MorganVMorganV Registered User regular
    At this point, I'm waiting on one of these dickbags to use the Sideshow Bob defense, and claim attempted rape isn't a crime.

    I no longer have an expectation that there's some point that at least some of these people will ever not do the wrong thing.

    And that the rest of them will back that person, regardless.

  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    i'm amazed they were able to find a woman to go on TV and make that argument

  • VishNubVishNub Registered User regular
    It remains fascinating that like none of the Kavanaugh defenders except Kavanaugh are even pretending nothing happened.

    Yeah they need to make up their mind on that. The two defenses being offered are mutually exclusive.

  • Captain InertiaCaptain Inertia Registered User regular
    Shivahn wrote: »
    I am perpetually baffled at the like, willful ignorance of the role of consent in, like, everything.

    It is so intuitively obvious that some things are ok when both people want to do it and not otherwise! Especially when it comes to, uh, "rough horseplay." But this kind of thing has been said before. Just frustrating that we live in a world where people are so disconnected and tribal that they miss things that are so obvious they're hard to explain.

    We live in a culture where consent is basically ignored as a principle.

    Or mocked

  • IncenjucarIncenjucar VChatter Seattle, WARegistered User regular
    Elendil wrote: »
    i'm amazed they were able to find a woman to go on TV and make that argument

    The degree to which women have been raised to undermine other women is worth it's own heavily-moderated thread, provided we have a few experts on hand to keep us in line.

  • Senna1Senna1 Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    Well, Kavanaugh has already hitched his wagon to the, "It never happened" train. He can't really back out and switch to "It happened, but was consentual/this is all a big misunderstanding/youthful indiscretions" without a hell of a lot of explaining and damage to his credibility.

    My bet is he's sticking to the "It never happened", and they're going to hammer Ms. Ford over the specifics she cannot remember and the length of time that's passed before going public. Unfortunately, some of them are significant details, and I'm already seeing the sneering comments from right-leaning sources about, "Well, if I was really raped I'd sure remember where and when it happened..."

    Senna1 on
  • MadicanMadican No face Registered User regular
    Incenjucar wrote: »
    Elendil wrote: »
    i'm amazed they were able to find a woman to go on TV and make that argument

    The degree to which women have been raised to undermine other women is worth it's own heavily-moderated thread, provided we have a few experts on hand to keep us in line.

    I think the mods might want this to wait until at least election season is over because things are going to be ramping up in this section in short order.

  • NebulousQNebulousQ Registered User regular
    edited September 2018
    VishNub wrote: »
    It remains fascinating that like none of the Kavanaugh defenders except Kavanaugh are even pretending nothing happened.

    Yeah they need to make up their mind on that. The two defenses being offered are mutually exclusive.

    Actually I wonder if their approach is the best PR approach. Have the accused hard deny and have others not directly associated with the accused try to control the narrative and muddy the waters.

    Having both the accused and other talking heads both go the hard deny route leaves space for others to control the narrative and paint a picture of what happened unopposed.

    To have both the accused and the talking heads try to control the narrative means that the accused admits something happened and gives credibility to the accuser.

    The current approach tries to get the best of both worlds: no credibility given to the accuser and a platform to fight for control of the narrative.

    Personally, I feel the approach that should be taken is for the accused to tell the truth and ceding the fight for the narrative beyond just telling the truth. This approach breaks down if the talking heads really do believe what they say about "it's just rough horseplay" or "it's just a political stunt". In which case, I am just sad at the state of things.

    NebulousQ on
  • KetBraKetBra Dressed Ridiculously Registered User regular
    Horseplay?

    What?

    Why don’t you get held down with hands over your mouth so you can’t scream and people turning up loud music so people can’t even hear your muffled noises as they try to get your pants off to penetrate you without your consent and tell me that’s goddamn “horseplay”.

    Ass.

    The point is not to make an actual argument that that is the case. The point is to put that argument in the air so that someone who has not heard the alegations will be prejuduced against accepting them.

    KGMvDLc.jpg?1
  • MazzyxMazzyx Comedy Gold Registered User regular
    Senna1 wrote: »
    Well, Kavanaugh has already hitched his wagon to the, "It never happened" train. He can't really back out and switch to "It happened, but was consentual/this is all a big misunderstanding/youthful indiscretions" without a hell of a lot of explaining and damage to his credibility.

    My bet is he's sticking to the "It never happened", and they're going to hammer Ms. Ford over the specifics she cannot remember and the length of time that's passed before going public. Unfortunately, some of them are significant details, and I'm already seeing the sneering comments from right-leaning sources about, "Well, if I was really raped I'd sure remember where and when it happened..."

    Which goes against the research when it comes to memory and traumatic events.

    u7stthr17eud.png
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    as far as I'm aware, there's no requirement for a "superPAC" to avoid coordination with the team supporting a Supreme Court nominee.

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    They scheduled the fucking hearing without asking Ford if she could appear. Just told her that's when they were going to do it.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • seabassseabass Doctor MassachusettsRegistered User regular


    Mitch McConnell, currently a senator, can be seen here dry humping the corpse of our democracy. Also, I love the juxtaposition of "Leader" in his handle and not taking any responsibility despite being the party in majority.

    Run you pigeons, it's Robert Frost!
  • EncEnc A Fool with Compassion Pronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered User regular
    That's shitty, but not uncommon, right?. Most hearings are scheduled with the senate first, and summons to the people who are being heard are sent after and ignoring is contempt of congress, I think?

  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    VishNub wrote: »
    It remains fascinating that like none of the Kavanaugh defenders except Kavanaugh are even pretending nothing happened.

    Yeah they need to make up their mind on that. The two defenses being offered are mutually exclusive.

    No, this is the exact same thing Trump did during the election. You just spit off every possible answer to the question, and then people will believe the one they want to. The other answers are just to trick the libs or just for show or whatever random excuse they come up with. "Consistency" is not a thing people care about. At least, not the people this messaging is being sent to.

    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Steam profile
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Enc wrote: »
    That's shitty, but not uncommon, right?. Most hearings are scheduled with the senate first, and summons to the people who are being heard are sent after and ignoring is contempt of congress, I think?

    When the hearing is literally convened to hear one person's testimony, they should probably ask her first.

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • TheBigEasyTheBigEasy Registered User regular
    seabass wrote: »


    Mitch McConnell, currently a senator, can be seen here dry humping the corpse of our democracy. Also, I love the juxtaposition of "Leader" in his handle and not taking any responsibility despite being the party in majority.

    I like how the first few answers to that tweet are basically a long string of "Merrick Garland".

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Also there's literally a witness to the act. He should be made to testify, even if his answers amount to "I drank a lot and don't remember."

    Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
  • CouscousCouscous Registered User regular
    The FBI is not investigating Kavanaugh because that requires the White House to tell them to. The White House is refusing to do so.

    AP and AP reporter:
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Trump: FBI shouldn't be involved in investigating Kavanaugh allegation, says 'I'm totally supporting him'
    Trump on hearing: "I can tell you this, Judge Kavanaugh is anxious to do it, I don't know about the other party, but Judge Kavanaugh is very anxious to do it and a delay is certainly acceptable, we want to get to the bottom of everything."
    He wants to get to the bottom of everything but doesn't want any sort of investigation by people whose job is getting to the bottom of everything.

This discussion has been closed.