6'8 Comey receives equivalent to sexual harrassment

[*michaelsean*]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/08/opinion/james-comey-and-the-predator-in-chief.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region&_r=0

Quote:As I listened to James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, tell the Senate Intelligence Committee about his personal meetings and phone calls with President Trump, I was reminded of something: the experience of a woman being harassed by her powerful, predatory boss. There was precisely that sinister air of coercion, of an employee helpless to avoid unsavory contact with an employer who is trying to grab what he wants.

After reading Mr. Comey’s earlier statement, I tweeted about this Wednesday night, and immediately heard from other women who had seen that narrative emerge. How recognizable it was that Mr. Comey was “stunned” to find himself in these potentially compromising positions. His incredulity, mixed with President Trump’s circling attempts to get his way, were poignant. For a woman who has spent a lifetime wrestling with situations where men have power they can abuse, this was disturbingly familiar.

On Jan. 27, Mr. Comey received a last-minute dinner invitation from the president, and then learned it would be “just the two of us.” On Thursday, Mr. Comey revealed that he had had to break a date with his wife in order to dine with Mr. Trump. Already, something about this “setup” made him “uneasy.”

The central business of this intimate dinner was Mr. Trump’s insistence: “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” Mr. Comey immediately recognized that this was a press for something he did not want to give. He froze: “I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed.”

That reaction — the choice of stillness, responses calculated to neither encourage nor offend that characterized so many of his dealings with Mr. Trump — is so relatable for any woman. During his testimony, Mr. Comey was asked why he had not responded more robustly, why he had not told Mr. Trump that he, the president, was acting inappropriately or reported his behavior immediately to others in authority.

Mr. Comey expressed regret that he had not been “stronger” about it, but explained that it was all he could do to focus on not saying the wrong thing. In other words, he wanted to avoid granting any favor while avoiding the risk of direct confrontation — a problem so deeply resonant for women.

During that interminable, awkward dinner, Mr. Comey struggled to convince Mr. Trump of the danger of “blurring” boundaries. But Mr. Trump was not deterred and returned to the subject of the loyalty he must have. There you hear the eternal voice of the predatory seducer: the man who knows how hard he can make it for a woman to refuse his needs.

Mr. Comey tried to wriggle out of the trap being set for him. He offered his “honesty,” hoping this would appease his insatiable host. Mr. Trump countered with a demand for “honest loyalty.” Mr. Comey acquiesced. Yet as he documented this “very awkward conversation,” his concession of this phrase troubled him. He hoped he had not been misunderstood by the president.

The victim of sexual harassment is constantly haunted by the idea that she said or did something that gave her persecutor encouragement. Serial harassers, of course, have an intuitive sense of this, and are skilled at manipulating and exploiting it.

Mr. Comey, you are not alone. How many of us have played over and over in our minds an encounter that suddenly took a creepy, coercive turn? What did I say? Were my signals clear? Did I do something ambiguous? Did I say something compromising?

At a White House ceremony on Jan. 22, Mr. Comey reportedly tried to blend in with the curtains, so that he would not be noticed by the president. Mr. Trump called to him and pulled him, unwilling, into a hug. What woman has not tried to remain invisible from an unwelcome pursuer’s attentions?

To this series of bizarre interactions, in which he faced escalating pressure, Mr. Comey reacted with rising anxiety and distress. Time after time, Mr. Trump reverted to his questionable agenda, and Mr. Comey, at each pass, tried to parry the president’s unwanted advances.

This dynamic with the president became so disturbing to Mr. Comey that, after an Oval Office meeting in February, he implored the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, “to prevent any future direct communication between the president and me.” Mr. Comey did not want to be left alone with his boss again. We’ve been there, Jim.

In their final exchange, on April 11, Mr. Trump told the F.B.I. director, “I have been very loyal to you, very loyal; we had that thing you know.” On May 9, having rebuffed the president, Mr. Comey was fired.

“We had that thing.” Once more, the seducer asserts a shared intimacy that was not really there, attempting to ensnare his victim with an imputed complicity.

In the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape, Mr. Trump said of any woman he wanted: “I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.” And he added: “Grab ’em by the *****. You can do anything.” With the power of the presidency at his disposal, Mr. Trump thought that he could use the psychology of coercive seduction on the nation’s chief law enforcement officer.

Victims of sexual harassment often face skepticism, doubts and accusations when they tell their story. That’s part of the predator’s power. But I’m here to tell James Comey, and all the women and men who have suffered at the hands of predators, I believe you.

[Benton]

Sexual assault or harassment is a problem. So is comparing it to a guy who doesn't feel comfortable having a conversation with someone else.

Bad opinion piece.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-12-2017, 01:55 PM)Benton Wrote: Sexual assault or harassment is a problem. So is comparing it to a guy who doesn't feel comfortable having a conversation with someone else.

Bad opinion piece.

Exceedingly bad, agreed on both counts.  The insane levels of false equivalency coming from the left at this point are rendering any dialogue on any issue meaningless.

[xxlt]

I just got around to reading the article in the OP today. I found it to be well written and entirely valid. But then, I have a lot of close female friends and a lot of close friends who are sex abuse survivors. I would like to think I would have been intelligent enough to appreciate the points the author made were those things not true.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-15-2017, 08:50 PM)xxlt Wrote: I just got around to reading the article in the OP today. I found it to be well written and entirely valid. But then, I have a lot of close female friends and a lot of close friends who are sex abuse survivors. I would like to think I would have been intelligent enough to appreciate the points the author made were those things not true.

Well, we can't all be so evolved and woke.  As to your post, color me not surprised.  Quite co-opting Mr. Comey's experiences!

[Belsnickel]

(06-15-2017, 08:50 PM)xxlt Wrote: I just got around to reading the article in the OP today. I found it to be well written and entirely valid. But then, I have a lot of close female friends and a lot of close friends who are sex abuse survivors. I would like to think I would have been intelligent enough to appreciate the points the author made were those things not true.

I didn't bother reading the article, but I had already heard this commentary from some people, including survivors of sexual assault. There was a lot of "let's be clear, there is no equivalency to sexual assault and what Comey went through." They just explained that the behavior discussed in the Trump/Comey dynamic, and the questions and commentary from those at the hearing, was very familiar to victims of sexual assault. Since it is more about power and domination than sex, it isn't at all surprising to them.

I'm just repeating their words on this. I didn't watch the testimony and haven't read much on it, so I don't know.

[xxlt]

(06-16-2017, 08:52 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I didn't bother reading the article, but I had already heard this commentary from some people, including survivors of sexual assault. There was a lot of "let's be clear, there is no equivalency to sexual assault and what Comey went through." They just explained that the behavior discussed in the Trump/Comey dynamic, and the questions and commentary from those at the hearing, was very familiar to victims of sexual assault. Since it is more about power and domination than sex, it isn't at all surprising to them.

I'm just repeating their words on this. I didn't watch the testimony and haven't read much on it, so I don't know.

But, to your credit, you aren't mocking Comey or victims of sexual assault. You aren't minimizing the experience of either. You note that you have heard similar commentary from multiple sources, and that it isn't at all surprising to these informed sources. Thus, there is a consistency in messaging from survivors about what you rightly call a power and domination dynamic. Well done. I will leave it to others to contrast your response with the OP and others in the thread.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-16-2017, 08:52 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I didn't bother reading the article, but I had already heard this commentary from some people, including survivors of sexual assault. There was a lot of "let's be clear, there is no equivalency to sexual assault and what Comey went through." They just explained that the behavior discussed in the Trump/Comey dynamic, and the questions and commentary from those at the hearing, was very familiar to victims of sexual assault. Since it is more about power and domination than sex, it isn't at all surprising to them.

I'm just repeating their words on this. I didn't watch the testimony and haven't read much on it, so I don't know.

What part wasn't a boss to employee scenario?  

[Belsnickel]

(06-16-2017, 11:14 AM)michaelsean Wrote: What part wasn't a boss to employee scenario?  

I would do a poor job of describing the behaviors that they discussed. I have been trained in helping students with sexual misconduct cases, and so am familiar with the concepts, but not familiar enough to adequately describe the details that were seen as similar behaviors to that of an abuser/victim relationship, especially being not overly familiar with the testimony itself.

[Matt_Crimson]

Ironic that the (former) FBI Director felt "uncomfortable" talking to Trump when he led an organization that "sexually assaults" the minds of everyone it interrogates.

[Dill]

(06-12-2017, 04:35 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Exceedingly bad, agreed on both counts.  The insane levels of false equivalency coming from the left at this point are rendering any dialogue on any issue meaningless.

As long as we are simply reversing charges without examples, might as well call them "the alt left."

[Dill]

(06-16-2017, 11:10 AM)xxlt Wrote: But, to your credit, you aren't mocking Comey or victims of sexual assault. You aren't minimizing the experience of either. You note that you have heard similar commentary from multiple sources, and that it isn't at all surprising to these informed sources. Thus, there is a consistency in messaging from survivors about what you rightly call a power and domination dynamic. Well done. I will leave it to others to contrast your response with the OP and others in the thread.

Well said.

[CKwi88]

Comparable....maybe.

Equivalent...no way.

[xxlt]

(06-17-2017, 04:29 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Comparable....maybe.

Equivalent...no way.

I believe Nicole Serratore (author of the Times  piece being discussed) would agree.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-17-2017, 04:29 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: Comparable....maybe.

Equivalent...no way.

It was a boss to an employee about their job. That's in no way even comparable to sexual harassment or abuse.

[Belsnickel]

(06-17-2017, 05:24 PM)michaelsean Wrote: It was a boss to an employee about their job. That's in no way even comparable to sexual harassment or abuse.

The description of the relationship was more comparable to abuser/victim than any boss/employee relationship I have seen.

[*michaelsean*]

(06-17-2017, 06:51 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The description of the relationship was more comparable to abuser/victim than any boss/employee relationship I have seen.

What part? When were they not talking about work? Sexual harassment /abuse by definition includes moving beyond a work relationship. When did he come across as an abuser of any sort? Was it the ominous dinner for 2? Yeah that never happens in Washington. The demand for loyalty? Again a new idea in Washington. Oh he said he would be loyally honest and hoped the President didn't misunderstand which is exactly like a woman hoping she didn't unknowingly green light a sexual advance. The best is fear of losing your job for not doing what the boss wants. Of course one involves sexual favors and one involves doing your job the way the boss says, but sure that's comparable. If all this nonsense was going through Comey's head then that's his problem and perhaps it's a good thing he is no longer in charge of the FBI.

The great feminists turned a blind eye with Bill Clinton, and now wish to minimize sexual abuse by comparing it to the reactions of this giant wus. All for politics. He wishes he were stronger? We all wish he had been stronger. He's the head of the f***ing FBI. He felt squeamish when Lynch asked him to change the wording. Was she abusing him? He felt nauseous when he thought he may have altered the outcome of the election. Who was his abuser then?

I mean the Democrats hated this man. They despised him, and now they want to portray him as some victim? It's hilarious.

Ok I think I'm done.

[Belsnickel]

(06-17-2017, 08:59 PM)michaelsean Wrote: What part? When were they not talking about work? Sexual harassment /abuse by definition includes moving beyond a work relationship. When did he come across as an abuser of any sort? Was it the ominous dinner for 2? Yeah that never happens in Washington. The demand for loyalty? Again a new idea in Washington. Oh he said he would be loyally honest and hoped the President didn't misunderstand which is exactly like a woman hoping she didn't unknowingly green light a sexual advance. The best is fear of losing your job for not doing what the boss wants. Of course one involves sexual favors and one involves doing your job the way the boss says, but sure that's comparable. If all this nonsense was going through Comey's head then that's his problem and perhaps it's a good thing he is no longer in charge of the FBI.

The great feminists turned a blind eye with Bill Clinton, and now wish to minimize sexual abuse by comparing it to the reactions of this giant wus. All for politics. He wishes he were stronger? We all wish he had been stronger. He's the head of the f***ing FBI. He felt squeamish when Lynch asked him to change the wording. Was she abusing him? He felt nauseous when he thought he may have altered the outcome of the election. Who was his abuser then?

I mean the Democrats hated this man. They despised him, and now they want to portray him as some victim? It's hilarious.

Ok I think I'm done.

I don't think you're understanding the comparison that is being made, but I am unsure how to explain it to be more understandable. The arguments you make are not against the arguments being made by those explaining the relationship as an abuser/victim dynamic, they aren't addressing the points they are making.

I think it boils down to perspective. In this case, there is a certain perspective that is needed to see this dynamic. Not everyone will see it because of different life experiences. That's the only thing I can think of to explain why this seems so obvious to some, and not so to others, which makes it so hard to explain.