HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
If Mort Divine ruled the world
- Thread starter Zephyrus
- Start date
Einherjar86
Active Member
rms
Active Member
It really isn't a good article.
Believing women means Biden should be cast aside and not allowed.to participate until the investigation has concluded.
The Dems aren't going to do this and this a complete hypocritical moment that no one should be surprised over. She doesn't mention this because that is the true problem with the movement
Believing women means Biden should be cast aside and not allowed.to participate until the investigation has concluded.
The Dems aren't going to do this and this a complete hypocritical moment that no one should be surprised over. She doesn't mention this because that is the true problem with the movement
Einherjar86
Active Member
That's exactly not what it says, but whatever. I know it's being shared for the purposes of ridicule, but she's making a good point.
Vegard Pompey
ALLY TO GOOD, NIGHTMARE TO YOU
The point about the #BelieveAllWomen not being the original tagline but rather one crafted in opposition as if to try to hold the MeToo movement to an impossible standard is fine, sure. Interesting even. But why make this point now, and in reference to the Tara Reade story, if not to justify dismissing the allegations? It's unclear if the "canard" in the subtitle is a reference to the #BelieveAllWomen hashtag or the Tara Reade allegations, too.
rms
Active Member
Exactly , it's cowardly and short sighted. Biden is the elephant in the room and never grappled with. Instead, acting as if liberals or Democrats don't participate in the hypocritical gotcha that the right has.
Which we see every fucking week with abortion and pro life. Shit article
Which we see every fucking week with abortion and pro life. Shit article
Einherjar86
Active Member
This sounds to me like all the author is guilty of is bad timing. But Tara Reade is hardly the first woman to bring accusations of sexual assault against a democratic official. Feminist detractors have been pulling this for a while now; Reade is just the most recent, and ongoing, example. If what the author says is accurate, then her timing actually couldn't be better. It's a corrective to the false binary imposed by right-wing commentators intended to make feminists look like hypocrites. But if we agree that Faludi's reporting is fine, and even "interesting," then the timing shouldn't matter.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Einherjar86
Active Member
I'm not really sure that's true.
First, Faludi is distinguishing between democrat and feminist--her argument is that right-wing commentators are pursuing a smear campaign in which feminism is reduced to mere political maneuvering. Most feminists might vote democrat in the U.S., but the activism behind "believing women" isn't the same as democratic politicians retweeting "#believeallwomen." She's delineating distinct rhetorical genealogies.
Second, I don't think Clarence Thomas's or Brett Kavanaugh's careers have suffered all that much "damage."
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Most contemporary feminism in America is political maneuvering. Why else would the countless activist orgs and celebs that stood up for accusers many times over be largely silent when Biden was accused? All she is doing is trying to pretend her side isn't hypocritical by playing a stupid word game.
Thomas and Kavanaugh were both subjected to show trials which made their confirmations much more painful than they probably needed to be. Particularly Thomas who was attacked over an alleged pube joke, porn star joke, and a couple rebuffed advances. Further, the nature of their accusations gave them a platform from which to refute, which many other accused lack.
Thomas and Kavanaugh were both subjected to show trials which made their confirmations much more painful than they probably needed to be. Particularly Thomas who was attacked over an alleged pube joke, porn star joke, and a couple rebuffed advances. Further, the nature of their accusations gave them a platform from which to refute, which many other accused lack.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I don't think it's a word game at all. I think it's a pretty interesting exposé on the ways that language changes as it makes its way through social and political media--usually according to the disposition of the one using it.
I don't think the media has been silent. We've been hearing about the allegations since March. As far as activist orgs and celebs go, do you know that journalists have tried to authenticate Reade's account and have had numerous problems, including Reade's claims to have been assaulted by Biden in cities that, records show, he wasn't in? This was never the case with Blasey Ford's accusations. There are material reasons why Blasey Ford was more eagerly "believed" while Reade has been viewed with more suspicion. That said, her claims are still being investigated.
It's true that their positions awarded them a degree of power; but the idea that there are countless cases out there of women falsely accusing men is a myth. The few cases that do crop up serve as fodder for paranoid man-children who claim that women are out to get them.
TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
What's the source on Joe Biden not being in town on the day Reade alleged assault? First time hearing that, and it sounds like a damning retort to me. fwiw I'm ambivalent on Reade and celebrity rape cases in general. I think there's shady details about her story and that she could easily be making it up, but don't pretend that Ford was any better, who struggled to remember any details about location, year, other people, etc until pressed, and then once pressed provided still-vague details and corroborators who consistently failed to back Ford's claims. By the end of the Kavanaugh farce, the Senate was reduced to asking questions about farting and drinking games in hopes of finding anything to nail him on perjury with (and failed).
Not countless, but the ones that hit the media circuit tend to wash out more often than not, and those that do get nabbed are usually serial offenders like Weinstein, Epstein, etc. Plus there are the closely-related hate crime hoaxes which serve the same purpose but to attract ethnic minorities rather than women to a position of servile victim-identity.
Not countless, but the ones that hit the media circuit tend to wash out more often than not, and those that do get nabbed are usually serial offenders like Weinstein, Epstein, etc. Plus there are the closely-related hate crime hoaxes which serve the same purpose but to attract ethnic minorities rather than women to a position of servile victim-identity.
Einherjar86
Active Member
I misremembered, it's that Reade couldn't remember when the assault happened--which isn't that shocking, and as you say is the same for Blasey Ford. But Ford's case is sturdier than Reade's, mainly due to the consistency of her claims and verification from others about when she told them. Reade's family and friends acknowledge they were told, but about what remains unclear. Her story has also changed over the years, and it's made it difficult for journalists to paint a clear picture of what's happened. This isn't what happened with Blasey Ford, who told one story and told it consistently. I'm not sure if you watched the testimony, but she provided a lot of information. The original Vox journalist who worked on the story has written about the investigative process: https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/2020/5/7/21248713/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accusation
But none of this is to say that Reade is lying, or that her claims shouldn't be given time to be proven or disproven (they'll likely never be proven, only substantiated); but the right-wing media presents that as the false choice, i.e. we either believe her fully or admit she's lying.
The burden of proof is difficult in a lot of cases. Weinstein got fucked by surveillance, which rarely happens. And the hate-crime hoaxes are also few and far between, with those that happen singled out as exemplary of a common trend.
HamburgerBoy
Active Member
- Sep 16, 2007
- 15,042
- 4,723
- 113
Reade narrowed it down to a season within a single year, and called on the existence of contemporaneous testimony (including the Larry King segment) which later backed it up to a tighter window. Ford's was far more vague, and she herself said that she suppressed the memory until a talk with a shrink circa 2013. The only thing Ford was more consistent on was the assault itself, with Reade downplaying the alleged sexual nature of it until recently.
Few and far between as a percentage of total crimes, absolutely. Few and far between as a percentage of the media cycle, lolno. Duke LaCrosse was THE story until it wasn't. Mattressgirl was THE story until it wasn't. Trayon Martin was THE story until it wasn't. Covington was THE story until it wasn't. Not to mention the men who have had their lives substantially ruined over unfounded accusations in college. The existence of the hoaxes and exaggerations wouldn't be such a big deal if the media didn't run with them so strongly.
http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/
Few and far between as a percentage of total crimes, absolutely. Few and far between as a percentage of the media cycle, lolno. Duke LaCrosse was THE story until it wasn't. Mattressgirl was THE story until it wasn't. Trayon Martin was THE story until it wasn't. Covington was THE story until it wasn't. Not to mention the men who have had their lives substantially ruined over unfounded accusations in college. The existence of the hoaxes and exaggerations wouldn't be such a big deal if the media didn't run with them so strongly.
http://www.fakehatecrimes.org/
Dak
mentat
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Do you believe Tara Reade? Her claims have serious credibility problems - Michael Tracey.
Then there's the "I believe you Reade, but I'm still voting for Joe anyway" crowd.
At the peak of Biden's mental faculties he was an architect of the Iraq invasion. TDS is so prevalent they'll whitewash a senile warmonger as "just a bit confused bruh."
Then there's the "I believe you Reade, but I'm still voting for Joe anyway" crowd.
At the peak of Biden's mental faculties he was an architect of the Iraq invasion. TDS is so prevalent they'll whitewash a senile warmonger as "just a bit confused bruh."
Einherjar86
Active Member
CiG
Approximately Infinite Universe
Personally I wouldn't vote for anybody I believed was a rapist. Even if I hated Trump as much as these people seem to do, Biden's political track record is worse than Trump's imo so I don't find the whole "but we gotta defeat Trump" very convincing.
Similar threads
