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

I don't know Flanagan, but I think one of the factors at play in her take might be that Ansari at least seems very non-threatening. Weinstein and Trump, well, they're gross and more obviously capable of physical violence—of dominating or hurting a woman if they wanted to. So the women involved seem more like victims, caught in the grip of a savage man. The idea that "Grace" was physically powerless against Ansari seems farther fetched. Apparently he's 5-foot-6 and 130 pounds. Hence the line about calling a cab.

 

Shifting tracks a touch - Dr. Larry Nassar continued to see patients for two years while five different institutions were investigating him for sexual misconduct. Several somebodies fucked up by the numbers.

Larry Nassar saw patients for more than 2 years while under criminal investigation

 

I'm not even going to argue with people hinting that pre-1960s Western marriage arrangements were a preferable social structure. I'm just going to laugh at them.

 

If you never cross the street your chances of getting run over by a cement truck are reduced dramatically, too, right? Is that preferable to never going off your block?

 

The Flanagan column was good. She was speaking woman to women.

 

That's not the point ... at least not mine, anyway. I didn't say it was preferable. My comment was strictly limited to yours, which implied that thus-and-such is a non-starter if it can't meet a standard of perfection. I find that line of thinking odd. Anyone can conjure up reasonable instances in which a particular approach won't deliver that. And, for the record, I don't think no-sex-outside-of-marriage is much of a solution ... but not because it can't eliminate the possibility of sexual assault. Even if it could eliminate the possibility, I wouldn't think too much of it.

I don't know if you ever read it -- you're roughly of the right age, but maybe it never crossed your radar -- but as a teenager I read Sara Davidson's Loose Change, about three women who came of age in 60s-era Berkeley. All three really struggled -- their whole lives, really -- with relationships with men who'd been "set free" by the sexual revolution. One of them said something to the effect that the men could fuck for lust and walk away, but the women just couldn't do it ... not just for the hell of it.

Now back then, when I read it I was thinking, "All right, sign me up!" And Lord knows I did my male-as-pig best (which wasn't too hot, truth be told) back in my day. But the hook-up culture that's followed our -- yours and mine -- day-and-age ... I guess I'm thinking, shit, this gets worse for women all the time ... what in the hell is next?

 

Well, you had to be reading it all at once like I did...

you said...Don't have sex outside marriage, perhaps.
someone else said...I was young and listened to my dumbass parents about not having sex until marriages
and then someone asked...If this is too personal, tell me to get lost, but if I'm reading this right—your wife was the first person you had sex with?

So I thought it was funny he asked that person that question and your comment might have prompted the same question.

 

Pre. Nup.

 

I'm re-reading the babe.net story to understand it from different angles.

1, had anyone ever heard of babe.net before this?

2, sorry to say but this smells like a catfish.

 

Tinder sounds like the worst hell I would ever want to endure. And I'm a guy! That part doesn't even sound appealing in a look-at-all-the-fun-my-divorced-friends-are-having kind of way.