Sexual Harrassment
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Stirlingsays  18 Nov 17 6.01am |
   |
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
For the record, the Republican-led Congress did impeach Clinton (not "try to" Meanwhile, George HW Bush is starting to run out of "but he's old now" rope for all of the arses he's grabbed over the years. Still nothing compared to that which Moore and Trump have been accused, more a sad example of how power and male privilege has been used down the years. Edited by Ray in Houston (17 Nov 2017 4.30pm) Personally, if sex is consensual then what Clinton or JFK did was between them and their wives as far as I'm concerned. If politicians are engaged in significant sexual harassment....that's something else. I suspect that what Bush Snr did is on a par with what creepy over friendly Joe Biden gets up to......all hidden in plain sight.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
; he paid a fine and lost his law license as punishment for his transgressions. There were sexual harassment accusations about him too (the Lewinsky tryst being an affair rather than harassment), which were dismissed as partisan attacks at the time (sound familiar) but I expect would be treated far more seriously if they'd been made now. Same with JFK.| Stirlingsays 18 Nov 17 6.12am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Oh no! If you are a degenerate, what chance have we got! Guilty as charged. Sex is a form of human interaction. But as it's intimate it's viewed very differently to most other forms.....I always find it surprising when its consensual forms get massively overblown reactions.....before contraception this perhaps made some sense. Essentially I'm against repression of things that aren't violent or harmful. Violence...is the manifestation of hate and as such represents the failure of discussion and compromise...or shows the lack of it....its consequences can be fatal and irreversible so it's serious forms should only really have a democratic mandate. While I'm quite socially libertarian........I remain a conservative on most things....as you know. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Nov 2017 11.07am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Nov 17 6.15am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
Project much Rey? Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Nov 2017 10.18am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Nov 17 6.23am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Ray in Houston
You seem to be the only one who cannot to grasp the difference between accidental physical contact or polite interaction and overly-aggressive attention or unwanted touching. And "boys will be boys" is not a valid defense. Edited by Ray in Houston (17 Nov 2017 4.27pm) Boys will be boys and girls will be girls and their normal natural behaviour celebrated and encouraged. There is nothing wrong in any of that. People who take liberties with others have always had negative feedback and it's only the rich and powerful who get to insulate themselves from that....but only to a time limited extent. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Nov 2017 10.15am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 18 Nov 17 7.44am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Boys will be boys and girls will be girls and their normal natural behaviour celebrated and encouraged. There is nothing wrong in any of that. People who take liberties with others have always had negative feedback and it's only the rich and powerful who get to insulate themselves from that....but only to an time limited extent. Is that altogether true these days? We are also told to 'celebrate' and encourage all sorts of behaviour that many consider far from being normal or natural. Edited by hedgehog50 (18 Nov 2017 7.45am)
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Nov 17 10.08am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
Is that altogether true these days? We are also told to 'celebrate' and encourage all sorts of behaviour that many consider far from being normal or natural. Edited by hedgehog50 (18 Nov 2017 7.45am) Not everyone develops along the majority path of the genders. No one is to blame for their genetics or the environment they grow up in. So for these individuals good teachers and parents look out for them and ensure that they get as smooth as path as possible...like they do for all children....and not so good parents and teachers don't. Growing up isn't easy for many children. Bullying happens to a lot of people for lots of different reasons......the short, the plain looking, the low IQ, the meek, the shy and so on. The child who wants to play with the other gender's toys or dress like them is just another off the rack.....but many progressives see them as a special case of course........if one of them commits suicide it's somehow more important than the low IQ guy or girl who does it..For some reason they don't feel so virtuous virtual signalling for that group....it's figures of trans groups that often get quoted not others...though those figures have their place and consideration like all issues, no more important or less important than other groups. Most progressives aren't aware of course that males make up three quarters of all suicides....not usually the narratives they like to focus on...because they are too busy telling us how awful men are. Suicide must obviously be just another one of Ray's imagined male 'privileges' I guess.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| hedgehog50 Croydon 18 Nov 17 10.40am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Not everyone develops along the majority path of the genders. No one is to blame for their genetics or the environment they grow up in. So for these individuals good teachers and parents look out for them and ensure that they get as smooth as path as possible...like they do for all children....and not so good parents and teachers don't. Growing up isn't easy for many children. Bullying happens to a lot of people for lots of different reasons......the short, the plain looking, the low IQ, the meek, the shy and so on. The child who wants to play with the other gender's toys or dress like them is just another off the rack.....but many progressives see them as a special case of course........if one of them commits suicide it's somehow more important than the low IQ guy or girl who does it..For some reason they don't feel so virtuous virtual signalling for that group....it's figures of trans groups that often get quoted not others...though those figures have their place and consideration like all issues, no more important or less important than other groups. Most progressives aren't aware of course that males make up three quarters of all suicides....not usually the narratives they like to focus on...because they are too busy telling us how awful men are. Suicide must obviously be just another one of Ray's imagined male 'privileges' I guess. Edited by Stirlingsays (18 Nov 2017 10.14am) No children should be bullied. But I don't think we should 'celebrate and encourage' any sort of sexuality in children.
We have now sunk to a depth at which the restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men. [Orwell] |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 18 Nov 17 10.57am |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by hedgehog50
No children should be bullied. But I don't think we should 'celebrate and encourage' any sort of sexuality in children. We shouldn't really be celebrating sexuality in children anyway. It shouldn't really be a consideration until they are teenagers for most of them. If someone is different...and most are different in some aspect or other.... in my book they don't get treated any better or worse. I don't agree with the recent trend in schools who are adapting for recognising 'trans' within schools....too young to deal with that. I'd want to pull my child out of a school like that. The rules are the rules for everybody.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Dave58 Ipswich 19 Nov 17 1.13pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Now Aled Jones has been taken off air. Not surprised that the No bollock BBC have done this. Seems if you don't like someone you accuse them of some trivial s***e and they are ruined. Accused privacy and indentity should be kept out the news until proved guilty.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 19 Nov 17 1.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Dave58
Now Aled Jones has been taken off air. Not surprised that the No bollock BBC have done this. Seems if you don't like someone you accuse them of some trivial s***e and they are ruined. Accused privacy and indentity should be kept out the news until proved guilty. It's the modern version of the salem witch trials....but in modern times it's trial by media, both social and organisational. All that is needed is accusation, evidence becomes of secondary importance. As with the salem trials it will only end when those in power themselves get accused......suddenly then the importance of evidence will make a remarkable comeback. Edited by Stirlingsays (19 Nov 2017 1.46pm)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Lyons550 Shirley 20 Nov 17 2.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Is Morrissey correct in his views about it all?
The Voice of Reason In An Otherwise Mediocre World |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 20 Nov 17 4.39pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
We shouldn't really be celebrating sexuality in children anyway. It shouldn't really be a consideration until they are teenagers for most of them. If someone is different...and most are different in some aspect or other.... in my book they don't get treated any better or worse. I don't agree with the recent trend in schools who are adapting for recognising 'trans' within schools....too young to deal with that. I'd want to pull my child out of a school like that. The rules are the rules for everybody. I think that in younger schools, like pre-teens, the only reason really for recognising trans is if they have a kid that is trans in that school. Whilst I don't really hold with this whole approach of 2 genders, when you're talking young kids it doesn't really matter - and really parents should be teaching their kids most of this s**t anyhow.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.