Even The Wolf likely can't clean up Harvey Weinstein's pending troubles

The story never mentions the photo and uses the word “harassment,” not “assault,” throughout.

 

They're not accusations anymore.

But, it would've definitely been put in the "boys will be boys" file.

Why some people think that's a good thing is beyond me.

 

I doubt anyone here would, or at least not many.

Andrea Mitchell would. She likes him. He’s nice.

 

I don't speak for Andrea Mitchell.

Speaking of which, feel free to peel the onion back on her relationship with Alan Greenspan.

 

I know. I was agreeing with you. There are people who think it would be a good thing. She’s one I recall when this story broke.

 

Here's what I think: You have a raging case of totally unjustified narcissism who has to turn everything into something about you. Maybe I believe what I believe about the constitution of sexual assault regardless of what some guy on a message board does for a living or where he practices it. Maybe one has absolutely nothing to do with the other, and rather than admit you just might be wrong—because, like Trump, you can never admit mistake or defeat—you have to dismiss the other side as the holders of some personal grudge rather than an honest (and in this instance, correct) position. It's pathetic.

 

I'd like to know whether you think that Ben Affleck committed sexual assault and whether the headlines and stories should have characterized it as such. The inconsistency is worth exploring. You have practiced and continue to practice journalism at a high level - including celebrity journalism, and I don't say that as a dig, but because I think that it potentially boosts your insight.

What say you?

 

I want you to really stop and listen to yourself. I want you to read that "How I Learned to Be Afraid of Men" story again.

If your reaction to "Make sure that you aren't pressuring women into meekly going along with something they don't want to do because they're afraid of you" is "Well I guess the human race will just stop existing because nobody can ever have sex," then you've got a fucking problem.

 

I get your point, but I was kidding because the unrealistic nature of his standard becomes apparent when you start to think about it in a real-world context. Does writing that make me a misogynist, too?

 

Pressuring your spouse to do something they don't want to do makes you a dick.

I continue to be open to discussing all these edge cases that apparently exist, but examples rarely seem forthcoming.

 

This is really quite something:

 

Please restrict your political whining to the politics thread.