Jump to content

Matt Lauer/Greg Zaun - when will this end??


kelownabomberfan
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Oh please.  When we get even in the realm of that, Ill be right there with you.  This isnt that, OBVIOUSLY.  No one has suggested they want that.  Its arguing a point that has never been made.  The real risk is, in considering arguments like that is people like the Moore and Trump supporters can hold it up as "reasonable" in the face of clear and believable allegations to cloud them. 

We're talking about a situation in which the overwhelming truth is these incidents are happening and one or two people make sure to say "gee, it sure sucks for those men being accused because maybe its false".  Huh?  That's a defense for the abusers.

Of course no one wants men to all be labelled predators.  I mean, really. 

with that I agree... when you have overwhelming supportive evidence and multiple people coming forward then yup there is no need for anyone to say "think of the guy, maybe its false.."  situations like moore, weinstein, lauer, etc..   nobody should be defending these guys..

 

thats not what I'm saying though, so we are probably off on 2 different tangents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SPuDS said:

with that I agree... when you have overwhelming supportive evidence and multiple people coming forward then yup there is no need for anyone to say "think of the guy, maybe its false.."  situations like moore, weinstein, lauer, etc..   nobody should be defending these guys..

 

thats not what I'm saying though, so we are probably off on 2 different tangents.

I know what you're saying.  It just has little to no bearing on the topic.  Its consideration for the outlier.  I think we can all appreciate that.  But other comments Basslicker made show he's more of the Moore/Trump defender ilk than the common sense 'ofcourse not every man is a predator' perspective.  I would not lump you in with that position.  I get what you're saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

I know what you're saying.  It just has little to no bearing on the topic.  Its consideration for the outlier.  I think we can all appreciate that.  But other comments Basslicker made show he's more of the Moore/Trump defender ilk than the common sense 'ofcourse not every man is a predator' perspective.  I would not lump you in with that position.  I get what you're saying.

fair enough. I definitely don't want to be considered someone who supports trump or supports accusers being dragged thru the mud.  women have been slighted for far too long and I am most happy to see predatory people getting their comeuppance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SPuDS said:

fair enough. I definitely don't want to be considered someone who supports trump or supports accusers being dragged thru the mud.  women have been slighted for far too long and I am most happy to see predatory people getting their comeuppance.

As someone who has actually had a falsehood said about me (properly vetted and appropriate deemed absurd), I can see your point.  But as someone who likes to think of themselves as a feminist (a Conservative one at that), my heart breaks for women brave enough to come forward who are declared liars and conspirators by the highest office in the US.

So I think we've come to an agreement!  And its not even lunch time.  A success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iHeart said:

I know there are a lot of people that dislike this decision.  I dont know Franken well enough to say but the bit I've seen, he's a very good Senator who has served the cause of women's rights.  However, my non-nuanced position is, if you want Moore out and you want Trump out, Franken is the sacrificial lamb to say we will not stand for this, regardless of politics. 

Edit: SNL alum...does he go back there?

Edited by The Unknown Poster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I know what you're saying.  It just has little to no bearing on the topic.  Its consideration for the outlier.  I think we can all appreciate that.  But other comments Basslicker made show he's more of the Moore/Trump defender ilk than the common sense 'ofcourse not every man is a predator' perspective.  I would not lump you in with that position.  I get what you're saying.

I'm not sure why you keep saying things like "it has no bearing on the topic". There  have been a couple of different tracks in this thread that are appropriate to the thread title even if you don't think they're relevant. I think we can all agree, well for the most part, on the topic of the abusers and victims that you've been referring to. I think, though, that the Romanado/Bezan situation  and apparently false accusations and how they affect the accused is germane to the thread.  Regardless of the frequency or impact on the accused, the apparent political opportunism displayed by Romanado is disgusting and demeaning. And maybe it's not having an immediate significant impact on Bezan but I think it is quite minimizing to say that it will just go away. I mean, just in this thread people are talking about the possibility of Darren Dutchyshen being an abuser based on an incident more than 15 years ago for which he was acquitted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

At the risk of getting my knuckles rapped for saying this, that is the most clueless thing ever posted on this forum and undermines the credibility of anything you have ever previously posted or ever will post.  Just...wow.

 

Yeah, it's actually difficult to find words that accurately describe just how wrong that statement is. I think "just...wow" summed it up pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, StevetheClub said:

I'm not sure why you keep saying things like "it has no bearing on the topic". There  have been a couple of different tracks in this thread that are appropriate to the thread title even if you don't think they're relevant. I think we can all agree, well for the most part, on the topic of the abusers and victims that you've been referring to. I think, though, that the Romanado/Bezan situation  and apparently false accusations and how they affect the accused is germane to the thread.  Regardless of the frequency or impact on the accused, the apparent political opportunism displayed by Romanado is disgusting and demeaning. And maybe it's not having an immediate significant impact on Bezan but I think it is quite minimizing to say that it will just go away. I mean, just in this thread people are talking about the possibility of Darren Dutchyshen being an abuser based on an incident more than 15 years ago for which he was acquitted.

There are people mentioning an office pool, which in itself is clearly a tongue in cheek thing, that Dutch would be outted as a creep based on a physical assault from 15 years ago where he fought someone at a wedding?

First of all, one has nothing to do with the other.

Secondly, I think the sarcasm inherent in "office pools" and such predicting who's next is going over some people's heads

Thirdly, it actually disproved your theory that Dutch got into a fight at a wedding 15 years ago and has done just fine since and literally ONE person mentioned him as a potential "next creep" BEFORE someone else mentioned the wedding fracas.  So in truth, it has zero to do with each.

To wrap this silliness up, the issue of false allegations is serious and real.  But let's not pretend a certain someone in this thread was making a serious and nuanced argument rather then being a Moore/Trump level supporter with the "if a woman was really assaulted, she'd have come forward before" outrageous argument.

And while its easy and convenient to ignore the facts that disprove this "what about the men" narrative, again, THIS particular issue which is the widely reported speaking out against this behavior in the wake of the Harvey story has shown us examples of people doing just fine after unsubstantiated allegations were made.  Others admitted wrong doing, apologized and were fine.  This is absolutely not a situation where "anything" said is being treated like a guy did the most heinous thing imaginable.  Different scenarios are seeing different reactions and consequences.

Im still waiting for the list of all the falsely accused men in the wake of Harvey to be posted. 
 

EDIT: And for the record @StevetheClub I dont mean to make it sound like Im lumping in you with that other person.  I appreciate your perspective, just countering some of it...

Edited by The Unknown Poster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's too bad Franken ended up being one of the bad guys. I honestly thought he was going to be a presidential candidate. When I saw the picture of him pretending to grab that woman while she was sleeping, I thought it was in poor taste, but otherwise relatively harmless. Then came the accusations of stalking and assault...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

There are people mentioning an office pool, which in itself is clearly a tongue in cheek thing, that Dutch would be outted as a creep based on a physical assault from 15 years ago where he fought someone at a wedding?

First of all, one has nothing to do with the other.

Secondly, I think the sarcasm inherent in "office pools" and such predicting who's next is going over some people's heads

Thirdly, it actually disproved your theory that Dutch got into a fight at a wedding 15 years ago and has done just fine since and literally ONE person mentioned him as a potential "next creep" BEFORE someone else mentioned the wedding fracas.  So in truth, it has zero to do with each.

To wrap this silliness up, the issue of false allegations is serious and real.  But let's not pretend a certain someone in this thread was making a serious and nuanced argument rather then being a Moore/Trump level supporter with the "if a woman was really assaulted, she'd have come forward before" outrageous argument.

And while its easy and convenient to ignore the facts that disprove this "what about the men" narrative, again, THIS particular issue which is the widely reported speaking out against this behavior in the wake of the Harvey story has shown us examples of people doing just fine after unsubstantiated allegations were made.  Others admitted wrong doing, apologized and were fine.  This is absolutely not a situation where "anything" said is being treated like a guy did the most heinous thing imaginable.  Different scenarios are seeing different reactions and consequences.

Im still waiting for the list of all the falsely accused men in the wake of Harvey to be posted. 
 

EDIT: And for the record @StevetheClub I dont mean to make it sound like Im lumping in you with that other person.  I appreciate your perspective, just countering some of it...

It's all good, I appreciate the clarification.

I used Dutch as an example that your past doesn't go away as easily as you're saying it does; I'm not sure if people are trying to draw the connection between the assault and him being a creep. I still think you're minimizing the impact of accusations on the falsely accused - I mean, how would you know if they "were fine", people carry all sorts of struggles that no one knows about. I get that the best you can do is lean on your own experience and what is public knowledge in responding, but I guess it just wouldn't be the same for me. Regardless of the outcome, I don't think I would just get over it if I was falsely accused of something like this. I doubt it would destroy me, but I wouldn't be fine with it; all I'm saying is I think there is room in-between and I think you're not appreciating that and assuming that how it has affected you is how it affects everyone and that what is public is true. I also agree that "the issue of false allegation is serious and real" and am confused as to why you're choosing not to talk about it and being condescending towards those who are trying to.  We both know that threads often go in different directions while staying under the same umbrella. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, StevetheClub said:

It's all good, I appreciate the clarification.

I used Dutch as an example that your past doesn't go away as easily as you're saying it does; I'm not sure if people are trying to draw the connection between the assault and him being a creep. I still think you're minimizing the impact of accusations on the falsely accused - I mean, how would you know if they "were fine", people carry all sorts of struggles that no one knows about. I get that the best you can do is lean on your own experience and what is public knowledge in responding, but I guess it just wouldn't be the same for me. Regardless of the outcome, I don't think I would just get over it if I was falsely accused of something like this. I doubt it would destroy me, but I wouldn't be fine with it; all I'm saying is I think there is room in-between and I think you're not appreciating that and assuming that how it has affected you is how it affects everyone and that what is public is true. I also agree that "the issue of false allegation is serious and real" and am confused as to why you're choosing not to talk about it and being condescending towards those who are trying to.  We both know that threads often go in different directions while staying under the same umbrella. 

Steve, if Im being condescending, its only in the face of people like basslicker taking a ridiculous approach to this.  He's hiding behind a serious subject to essentially defend the men who have acted badly.  His remark about women not coming forward is as close to calling them liars as it gets.  Thats one of the reasons so many women dont come forward and it has to stop.

My point is, Im really surprised that anyone (and its very few) would take this time to raise the very real issue of false allegations.  The reason I am surprised is because it is true that defenders of the bad acts will use that as a deflection technique (co-opting a serious perspective), its addressing the more minor of the two "sides" and really, its sort of addressing something that really isnt in evidence.

Its essentially saying we have to stop this because mens lives are being ruined.  On the contrary, we should be encouraging victims to come forward and happy this movement has begun where so many can feel safe about doing so.  The issue of false allegations is a real one, but so very small in comparison to the legitimacy.

My point was not to belittle the real impact false accusations can have (I've seen it and felt it myself).  It was more an expression of surprise that anyone would really pick up the mantle of defending innocent men in the face of little to no examples of that happening in this particular wave of #metoo movement.  And then it snowballs from there.  Make no mistake, we can discuss it.  But it seems like really poor timing and insensitive to the larger issue.  And anyone who calls into question the veracity of victims because they didnt come forward immediately has no credibility and is NOT engaging in a serious nuanced discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Noeller said:

we've been talking at work about "Who's Next...?" and the betting favourite is Darren Dutchyshen........

If we are playing the who is next from TSN...  I'd put money on the weirdo with plastic surgery  ,  narcissism and mental issues.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I know there are a lot of people that dislike this decision.  I dont know Franken well enough to say but the bit I've seen, he's a very good Senator who has served the cause of women's rights.  However, my non-nuanced position is, if you want Moore out and you want Trump out, Franken is the sacrificial lamb to say we will not stand for this, regardless of politics. 

Edit: SNL alum...does he go back there?

I don't see how anyone who is going after the Republicans/Hollywood creeps could possibly dislike this decision.  Franken has proven himself to be a creep and stepping down is the right thing to do.  Whether he has stood up for women's rights or anything else is irrelevant.  Being good to 100,000 women doesn't give someone the right to harass or assault one woman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

At the risk of getting my knuckles rapped for saying this, that is the most clueless thing ever posted on this forum and undermines the credibility of anything you have ever previously posted or ever will post.  Just...wow.

 

Actually, it's straight from the mouths victims, real victims.  Have you ever met any?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Steve, if Im being condescending, its only in the face of people like basslicker taking a ridiculous approach to this.  He's hiding behind a serious subject to essentially defend the men who have acted badly.  His remark about women not coming forward is as close to calling them liars as it gets.  Thats one of the reasons so many women dont come forward and it has to stop.

My point is, Im really surprised that anyone (and its very few) would take this time to raise the very real issue of false allegations.  The reason I am surprised is because it is true that defenders of the bad acts will use that as a deflection technique (co-opting a serious perspective), its addressing the more minor of the two "sides" and really, its sort of addressing something that really isnt in evidence.

Its essentially saying we have to stop this because mens lives are being ruined.  On the contrary, we should be encouraging victims to come forward and happy this movement has begun where so many can feel safe about doing so.  The issue of false allegations is a real one, but so very small in comparison to the legitimacy.

My point was not to belittle the real impact false accusations can have (I've seen it and felt it myself).  It was more an expression of surprise that anyone would really pick up the mantle of defending innocent men in the face of little to no examples of that happening in this particular wave of #metoo movement.  And then it snowballs from there.  Make no mistake, we can discuss it.  But it seems like really poor timing and insensitive to the larger issue.  And anyone who calls into question the veracity of victims because they didnt come forward immediately has no credibility and is NOT engaging in a serious nuanced discussion.

 

I'm not defending the Weinstein/Conyers of the world.  I'm just tired of the virtue signalers and I think there needs to be a voice reminding people that they still need proof.  I'm defending the men who are wrongly accused, of which I gave examples. 

Funny how no one gave a damn when Bill Clinton was being called out by women who say he raped them.  Hilary crushed them and their credibility.  But now that it's 'cool' to pretend like you give a damn (I can't believe it took until it was trendy for this to happen) the virtue signalers and white knights are everywhere......doing nothing in reality, but man it feels good to pretend like you're a champion of innocence doesn't it?

 

But I guess I shouldn't expect any less from the majority of MBB members.   Leftie and bleeding hearts abound. 

Justice won't be found in this life anyway, the offenders will get their judgment just like the rest of us.  (just ask Matt Lauer, who will be 'retiring' to his mansion after all these disgusting revelations about him)

God Bless.  

Edited by basslicker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

@basslicker

Im not saying you're wrong but if you claim many men have been destroyed in the US, please name them.

How can you name people as most would be strangers? My friend in Winnipeg went thru a nasty divorce in the late 80's with their daughter involved. He had visitation rights afterwards but the ex wife always tried to get out of it. One time, she accused him of sexual assault on his daughter because she claimed the girl had a bruise on her inner thy. Had the cops & lawyers involved. No charges were ever laid but he told me she would phone him at work randomly accusing him of all kinds of nasty things from week to week. She was married twice & didn't have to work with the support payments from 2 former  husbands.   He put his ex wife thru university, supported her financially but as soon as she graduated she bolted demanding a divorce. The guy went to pieces emotionally for being treated like garbage foe years & she polluted his daughters mind so badly that he now has no relationship with his daughter at all. He spiralled down from an IT tech thru different jobs. Now, he works part time at Safeway. The guy had a nervous breakdown & is a mess. The guy was brilliant as an IT tech & now he's just a shell of his former self. He's in his 60's. So, are lives destroyed? Yes, very much so from wingnuts like that.

Name me all the people charged with DUI in Manitoba the past 5 years? They at least got their day in court. The only court I see here when it comes to sexual assault is the MBB Court of Public Opinion & the verdict is guilty.

Edited by SpeedFlex27
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

How can you name people as most would be strangers? My friend in Winnipeg went thru a nasty divorce in the late 80's with their daughter involved. He had visitation rights afterwards but the ex wife always tried to get out of it. One time, she accused him of sexual assault on his daughter because she claimed the girl had a bruise on her inner thy. Had the cops & lawyers involved. No charges were ever laid but he told me she would phone him at work randomly accusing him of all kinds of nasty things from week to week. She was married twice & didn't have to work with the support payments from 2 former  husbands.   He put his ex wife thru university, supported her financially but as soon as she graduated she bolted demanding a divorce. The guy went to pieces emotionally for being treated like garbage foe years & she polluted his daughters mind so badly that he now has no relationship with his daughter at all. He spiralled down from an IT tech thru different jobs. Now, he works part time at Safeway. The guy had a nervous breakdown & is a mess. The guy was brilliant as an IT tech & now he's just a shell of his former self. He's in his 60's. So, are lives destroyed? Yes, very much so from wingnuts like that.

Name me all the people charged with DUI in Manitoba the past 5 years? They at least got their day in court. The only court I see here when it comes to sexual assault is the MBB Court of Public Opinion & the verdict is guilty.

That’s the point. We’re talking Hollywood, media, celebrities etc 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...