Grope a dope: Trump is on the ropes now

[Belsnickel]

(10-11-2016, 03:07 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Gotcha. Everytime a celebrity has sex with a non celebrity it's sexual assault.

I'm surprised there aren't more celebrities being arrested for sexual assault.

Sent from my SPH-L710T using Tapatalk

You must've had some extra straw laying around, today.

(10-11-2016, 03:11 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This sounds kind of made up.

The idea of perceived authority in a situation like that being as real as legitimate authority? Not at all. There is even legal precedent for it.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2016, 03:32 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The idea of perceived authority in a situation like that being as real as legitimate authority? Not at all. There is even legal precedent for it.

No the part about being a star gives you authority over someone. I'm sure the percieved part of the equation would have to stand the reasonable person test.

Being a star may give you referent power over some, but no authority.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2016, 03:20 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: So he had to wait for Bush to give them permission before he hugs her and kisses her on the cheek because the cameras are watching? Give me a break. Men "welcome" themselves to women like this all the time on live television without permission yet for some reason the big ol' rapist Donald Trump who can't control himself around beautiful women had to wait for Bush to initiate any sort of physical contact between them and didn't even bother to tall her how good she looks.

Okay, why do you think he didn't grab her by the ***** on camera?

[Belsnickel]

(10-11-2016, 03:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: No the part about being a star gives you authority over someone. I'm sure the percieved part of the equation would have to stand the reasonable person test.

Being a star may give you referent power over some, but no authority.

I never said celebrity gives you authority, I said it can result in perceived authority. And perceived authority has stood up to legal tests. If the victim perceives authority is being held by their assailant, legitimate or not, then it is a coercive action using that authority.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2016, 03:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I never said celebrity gives you authority, I said it can result in perceived authority. And perceived authority has stood up to legal tests. If the victim perceives authority is being held by their assailant, legitimate or not, then it is a coercive action using that authority.

This is you just delving further in the assumption game to try to find someone guilty of sexual assault with no proof.

Being a star gives you no authority over anyone perceived or otherwise and I would like to see a precendent where it did based on the reasonable person concept,

There may be cases of those being swooned by star-power, but no authority. Folks just want to use the word authority because the torches were getting low and that makes it sound worse.

Is it possible Trump had power over those that he supposedly touched? Yes. Most likely why they consented to let him do it. But the power was referent, not legitimate; which is authority (percieved or otherwise)

[Belsnickel]

(10-11-2016, 04:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: This is you just delving further in the assumption game to try to find someone guilty of sexual assault with no proof.

Being a star gives you no authority over anyone perceived or otherwise and I would like to see a precendent where it did based on the reasonable person concept,

There may be cases of those being swooned by star-power, but no authority. Folks just want to use the word authority because the torches were getting low and that makes it sound worse.

Is it possible Trump had power over those that he supposedly touched? Yes. Most likely why they consented to let him do it. But the power was referent, not legitimate; which is authority (percieved or otherwise)

You're just trying to play a semantics game. Authority is having power. If one has referent power, then there is going to be a perceived authority. And, whether we call it referent power, perceived authority, what have you, if someone is using that in an aggressive sexual manner it is coercive no matter what you call it. So the semantic back and forth you're engaging in is really irrelevant.

[Matt_Crimson]

(10-11-2016, 03:19 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: I answered it three times, elaborating each time when you asked me to. He claims he did these things. I tailored my question so that it addressed why actually doing these things or claiming you have makes you unfit to be President. 

If you disagree, that's fine, but stop being a child by repeating that I didn't answer the question. 

Being a child? Youre the one who doesn't know how to answer a question. Let me break this down.

What I asked was for someone to give me an honest answer of why having the sexual conversation Trump was having makes him unfit for president.

What you then basically said was "because sexual assault is wrong". 

How does that answer my question? My question was not "Why is Trump, a man who has been convicted of sexual assault and been proven to sexually assault women unfit to be president". That's the question you are answering. But the problem is, that's not the question I asked, that's what you're trying to cleverly turn my question into. 

You're answering the question from the standpoint that Trump has sexually assaulted someone which is an intellectually dishonest answer. There's no proof he sexually assaulted anyone nor has he made that claim. So your so called answer does not fit the question.

[Matt_Crimson]

(10-11-2016, 03:43 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Okay, why do you think he didn't grab her by the ***** on camera?

BECAUSE HE'S NOT A GOD DAMN RAPIST. Not because the cameras were on. Holy christ.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2016, 04:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You're just trying to play a semantics game. Authority is having power. If one has referent power, then there is going to be a perceived authority. And, whether we call it referent power, perceived authority, what have you, if someone is using that in an aggressive sexual manner it is coercive no matter what you call it. So the semantic back and forth you're engaging in is really irrelevant.

Call it semantics if you want, but we're not talking the difference between happy and glad here and I would hope you understand that. There is nothing coercive about referent power (but there is about legitimate power "authority") and it is relevant, but yeah; go with just semantics.

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2016, 04:16 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: BECAUSE HE'S NOT A GOD DAMN RAPIST. Not because the cameras were on. Holy christ.

I was waiting for someone to hit that lob out of the park.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2016, 04:16 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: BECAUSE HE'S NOT A GOD DAMN RAPIST. Not because the cameras were on. Holy christ.

I never accused him of being a rapist nor have I suggested grabbing a woman's ***** inappropriately without their consent is rape. You are disagreeing with something I never claimed. 

However, the question stands, why do you think Trump didn't grab her ***** on camera?

[Rotobeast]

(10-11-2016, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I would like someone to explain exactly what is consent to being kissed, because, I'm here to tell you I've kissed a girl or 2 in my time without first asking "may I"

I'm wondering this myself.
I think that out of the 50+ (conservatively estimated, as I only kept a list of sexual partners) women I've kissed romantically, I maybe asked 2-3 (which was likely early high school).
I suppose I'm to be considered evil by the majority of the board.
But given the lack in perception of body language displayed by most in discussion of another topic, I have super-powers that have saved me from prosecution.

More on topic....

Trump is a douche.
This will sink him, especially since more of the same will come out.
It's more on public perception, than actual events and ect... (too bad it's not working that way with Clinton)

However.....

》Trump tells nothing but lies ! You can never believe him.

》Trump sexually assaulted a woman. You heard it from his own words.

PICK ONE !


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[Matt_Crimson]

(10-11-2016, 04:46 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: I never accused him of being a rapist nor have I suggested grabbing a woman's ***** inappropriately without their consent is rape. You are disagreeing with something I never claimed. 

However, the question stands, why do you think Trump didn't grab her ***** on camera?

Okay fine you didn't call him a rapist, so let me rephrase..... BECAUSE HE'S NOT A GOD DAMN SEXUAL ASSAULTER. I dunno, just doesn't roll as nicely off the tongue, but it'll do.

[Belsnickel]

(10-11-2016, 04:30 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Call it semantics if you want, but we're not talking the difference between happy and glad here and I would hope you understand that. There is nothing coercive about referent power (but there is about legitimate power "authority") and it is relevant, but yeah; go with just semantics.

There is nothing inherently coercive in any power, only in how it is used. And yes, we are talking about the difference between happy and glad. Authority and power are synonyms, after all.

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2016, 04:15 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Being a child? Youre the one who doesn't know how to answer a question. Let me break this down.

What I asked was for someone to give me an honest answer of why having the sexual conversation Trump was having makes him unfit for president.

What you then basically said was "because sexual assault is wrong". 

How does that answer my question? My question was not "Why is Trump, a man who has been convicted of sexual assault and been proven to sexually assault women unfit to be president". That's the question you are answering. But the problem is, that's not the question I asked, that's what you're trying to cleverly turn my question into. 

You're answering the question from the standpoint that Trump has sexually assaulted someone which is an intellectually dishonest answer. There's no proof he sexually assaulted anyone nor has he made that claim. So your so called answer does not fit the question.

No, I understand that you're trying to pose the question as if nothing Trump claimed to do is sexual assault. Unfortunately, you're asking a question about a conversation that does describe sexual assault. 

If you're unsatisfied with the answer, it's because you haven't accepted reality yet. 

[*bfine32*]

(10-11-2016, 05:12 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: There is nothing inherently coercive in any power, only in how it is used. And yes, we are talking about the difference between happy and glad. Authority and power are synonyms, after all.

Yes, but one type of power allows me to use coercion while another......


Nevermind, I'm sure you understand the difference, you just have your heels dug in. Continued discussion will prove fruitless. Let's go with semantics; I will keep this fail-proof tactic in mind.

[BmorePat87]

(10-11-2016, 04:16 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: BECAUSE HE'S NOT A GOD DAMN RAPIST. Not because the cameras were on. Holy christ.

If he has dissociative identity disorder and jerks off, he is a rapist. 

Or something. Someone tried to claim that once. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(10-11-2016, 05:14 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: No, I understand that you're trying to pose the question as if nothing Trump claimed to do is sexual assault. Unfortunately, you're asking a question about a conversation that does describe sexual assault. 

If you're unsatisfied with the answer, it's because you haven't accepted reality yet. 

Alright.

So if anyone else could actually answer my question that'd be great.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-11-2016, 03:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I would like someone to explain exactly what is consent to being kissed, because, I'm here to tell you I've kissed a girl or 2 in my time without first asking "may I"

No problem. The answer is on page 17 and 18 of the PDF

[Vas Deferens]

(10-11-2016, 05:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: If he has dissociative identity disorder and jerks off, he is a rapist. 

Or something. Someone tried to claim that once. 

apparently some demented perverts interpret '***** oneself' completely different logistically.  they feel it necessary to involve blades and such.