ilovefuzz.com

aens_wife wrote:

hbombgraphics wrote: You are correct about the lack of justice, and anger is absolutely a valid response in some ways. I would caution that Violence is probably not a good workaround to our embarrassing justice system.

This is kind of an important point for me. If we want to change the system, a LOT of the typical male cultural responses are going to have to change. Male violence and their physical size/strength is part of the reason sexual violence is so prevalent. Women are afraid they are gonna get killed if they say no/fight back/expose their attacker/harasser. So by responding to the problem with more of the same is just upholding the system that we are fighting against.

And to the "free speech at all costs" guys, I don't understand how you can say that everyone should be able to say anything to further the debate. All that says to me is that whoever is loudest/meanest gets to keep intimidating those with less power. I am not saying that difficult things shouldn't be said. I am saying that maybe we think about who we are saying them to, and how they might be perceived, and we say them carefully. We learn to say them in a way that will do the least damage. I don't know why that is such a contested concept. Why wouldn't we want to be kinder to those around us? Why is unchecked free speech a bigger/better ideal than compassion and empathy?

Bassist_Diver wrote:Add Al Franken to the list

http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-t ... l-franken/

JonnyAngle wrote:

Bassist_Diver wrote:Add Al Franken to the list

http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-t ... l-franken/

There's always a part in the story that the offender "doesn't remember"

jrfox92 wrote:The most telling thing is that the people that wanted to crucify every republican, actor, etc. that's been implicated in all these recent outings are now saying "well, she works for Fox Sports and she was in Playboy and worked at Hooters and the timing is questionable" or "the groping thing was just a joke, ignore the part where she's passed out" or "oh, but I like him, he shouldn't have to step down because of this, it was soooo long ago".

repoman wrote:Theres a picture of him grabbing her tits while she's passed out

Let’s start with the premise of the innocence argument: that voters should discount the allegations until they’re proven in court. That sounds fair, but it’s impossible. The alleged offenses took place decades ago, well outside Alabama’s statute of limitations. Moore can’t be charged or sued. His accusers will never get their day in court, unless he agrees to testify under oath, which could subject him to prosecution for perjury.
Naturally, he has declined this challenge.

So anyone who tells you to ignore the allegations until they’re validated in court is telling you, in effect, to ignore them forever.