It’s not often I have to explain myself (well, except to Sally, of course….daily….hourly, even…)

My last blog was not clear.  I apologize for that.  Buttons pressed, I tended to tangents.  But clarity is the whole point of writing. So I am going to re-state what I said in the last blog more cogently, I hope.  And briefly.  Sorry.

  1. Sexual behaviour in our era has been radically modified from times past. Some of it very recently.  And some of it I find a bit weird.  Almost all of it I find hypocritical.  And it has become a news topic ‘out of all proportion‘ as far as I am concerned.  Further to that, men and women have been to’ing and fro’ing over what constitutes ‘acceptable’ forever and it would seem apparent to anyone that the twain shall never fully meet. NOT completely. BUT WE OBVIOUSLY WORK IT OUT WELL ENOUGH TO KEEP US GOING AS A SPECIES.  Gender politics is the original never-ending story.
  2.  Trump should be condemned for his ‘locker room’ banter (mostly because it is not presidential nor is it common in the locker rooms I have been in but walking home after the game with your teammates…well, that is sometimes different), to be sure but, to my mind, he should have been condemned far more for his attacks on the Khan family, Muslims and Mexicans.  And a rich man running for president who has not paid taxes in his country for almost twenty years is beyond my comprehension.  How is he even eligible?
  3. The Republican party as a whole turned a blind eye to all the major flaws in his character but when he said he ‘groped pussy‘, they drew the line!  What the hell kind of value system is that?  A man acts like a pig by groping is enough to condemn him but hate-speech on Muslims and Mexicans is not? And they are PROUD of him for NOT paying taxes?  That says so much about the Republican party.
  4. No woman likes to be violated.  In any way.  Neither does any man.  But women have been voluntarily accepting compensation for sexual violation since the beginning of time. They have made an industry of it.  Not all women, of course, but many.  Especially in the USA.  Money, it seems, ‘makes it all better’.  And I find that behaviour deplorable, too.  And all too common. Tell me I am wrong……………. ?

OK………….on to the debate.  The media have it for Hillary.  The occasional commentator says Trump won primarily because he did not fold and implode.  I think they both won.  Hillary because she actually spoke like a proper presidential candidate and because the Donald was back in his typical clown-ish way after having been beaten up badly by the ‘grope’ story.  But…. (clarity at stake here)….they both lost.  

They both lost a helluva lot!  NOT for themselves but for the office they are trying to gain.  The big loser in the debate was the status and esteem of the Oval Office.  No longer is that hallowed ground viewed as a modern day Mt. Olympus.  It is now viewed at street level.  I saw the gutters.  It is a rooming house on the bad side of town.  If these people are vying to live there, I, for one, prefer my place.  In fact, I might prefer a clean Motel 6 over that stinky joint.  They debased the White House simply by being there and talking like that.

There were times during the debate, I actually cringed.  The conversation was so coarse that I was embarrassed for them.  Had Robert DeNiro walked on stage and punched the Donald in the face, I would not have been in the least surprised.

Someone should have.

 

24 thoughts on “It’s not often I have to explain myself (well, except to Sally, of course….daily….hourly, even…)

  1. “Its gonna be so awesome”. “So fast” ” “I talked to 80 Generals and we’re gonna take care of ISIS in the first 30 days’ “It’ll be unbelievable” .
    Big inhale through the nose.
    “Im gonna help blacks and latinos.” “They love me” ” Whats she done over the past 30 years axcept talk about it? She’s done nothing…” “I’m gonna get things done in 30 days” “It’ll be so amazing”

    Donald Trump has mastered the 30 second sound bite.
    All while saying nothing while promising vague “everything’s” .
    We live in an attention deficit world where people communicate in 140 character “tweets”.
    Pretty hard to state ones well reasoned, well planned political opinion in 2 minutes when the average voter cant keep their brow furrowed in concentration for more than 30 seconds.
    Hillary Clinton. The most unpopular Presidential alternative since Bush defeated Gore in 2000 by 0.01 %
    If Paul Ryan had won the Republican nomination and run against Clinton he’d be sworn in as President in Jan 2017.
    The religious nutters and racist loons in the republican party have earned every one of the 1000 cuts being suffered by Trump as he slowly (intentionally?) tears down their house of cards

    Thats entertainment folks.

    Like

    • You DO have to wonder……why the hell Twitter is the go-to medium these days….? By definition, it is severely limited (144 characters?). I can’t order fast food in that tight a message…
      I love your idea that this is all intentional but I really do not think so…..Trump is gonna suffer post election. It’s inevitable.

      Like

    • what planet are you folks on, the essence of twitter is the hot links, it gives you a map, with 140 characters you could have access to realms beyond your comprehension, or is there some ‘context’ here that is escaping me,,??

      Like

      • Yes, Aldo, a smidge of context is escaping you….OUR conversation was NOT about Trump except at the start. The bulk of our conversation is about what is required for consent – for all people, all the time. We concluded that context was required to determine when sexual boundaries had been violated or merely misunderstood or whatever. In other words, we concluded that context rather than strictly adhered to wording is an essential element.
        As to Twitter……………..I do not think it can provide realms of credible information beyond my comprehension…………but, of course, one does not know what one does not know. So, you might be right. Thanks for the heads up. Having said that, what the Donald tweets (from what I have seen) is not worth my or anyone’s time……

        Like

      • Sorry Aldo
        But the Twitter-verse (like Facebook) has about as much appeal to me as an abcessed wisdom tooth extraction by a blind, spastic chimp with a dull, filthy, rusty spoon.
        And apparently hundreds of millions of people that USED to flock to Twitter but have abandoned it in droves……agree with moi.
        Twitter, Facebook, whatever.
        Another way for advertisers (and God only knows who else) to track your every move.

        No thanks.

        Like

      • We once lived on the planet of the Banal, where oral and written truth unfolded in 140 characters. Currently I’m re-writing Hamlet for tweet publication. “To be or not be that is the question: Whether ‘this nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune or take arms against a sea troubles and by opposing end them. The tweet would read the…Conflicted Repulicans moot as party tanks.#crazyasspoisonpill.

        Like

      • I think it is mistake to equate twitter to facebook, I don’t tweet but I audit people thru twitter whom I consider to be excellent curators of online information.
        With many of my favored journalists I get immediate access to their syndicated output without being impeded by pay walls.
        IMHO any reference to 140 characters completely misses what twitter is about.
        It’s easy to conjure twitter as failed road kill, partly because it has eschewed the low hanging fruit on the monetization tree.
        For the time I have used it there has been no deleterious side effects.
        After the recent false takeover rumor the outfit today is still marked at 13 billion US dollars of value.
        Surely that would suggest that there is more to it then a 140 character, mini blog site, would you not agree,,?

        Like

  2. The politics of what Trump said on the tape released recently have been spun in various ways. Some say that it was just harmless male banter, the others saw it as hate speech, some thought of it as a description of sexual assault and Trump said it was locker room conversation. It is worth also saying that Trump was at work in a work place, also Trump was in a position of power because of his wealth and media status. Trump was talking about how easily he could abuse the privilege of his fame. Not sex but raw power.

    Like

    • Agreed. And THAT DOES speak to the office he seeks. As did his threat that if he won, he would instruct the Attorney General to re-open the case against Hillary. THERE was a revelation of what kind of power abuse he would be employing in likely ALL things.

      Like

  3. Furthermore The Donald, assumes that because women do not protest in the moment they ‘let him do it.’ Silence is not consent, not protesting is not consent and letting is not consent. In the face of a power imbalance, being groped by the owner of the Miss Universe pageant, being ogled while dressing or being talked about derogatorily is abuse.

    Like

    • I agree. I have said that……..less stridently but I said that. What I am also saying is that such an evil deed (ogling, dissing and even groping) is NOT as bad hate mongering Muslims and Mexicans. The person being groped might feel differently but I am saying that hate-speech is worse. IF he abused that power and raped, the scales of justice turn. Actions are stronger than words.
      I am also saying that ‘if he ogled’ contestants at the Miss Universe pageant….well….duh….that is why they are there.

      Like

    • “Silence is not consent, not protesting is not consent and letting is not consent.” THAT is politically correct. And I understand the argument (terror may freeze the victim) but such an extreme statement (to me) is simply NOT realistic in one on one adult encounters – especially if they know one another. Doubly so if they have spoken for any length of time. For evil to be done, good people only need do nothing. To correct wrong, we must stand up and voice our objections. In every sexual encounter, one party tentatively initiates and the other accepts or rejects. The dynamics are then re-assessed. Stunned nothing in a moment of heightened passion WILL be perceived as ‘permission’ at least to go a step further. And silence and compliance throughout the entire act will be interpreted by most people as consent. I understand the statement that it should not be but I would argue that some indication of NOT accepting is required at some point unless, of course, the ‘terrified frozen’ defense is legitimate. I have rarely encountered a woman who said, “Oh, and by the way, you are now permitted to kiss me and you might want to try initiating a little foreplay. Here’s a permission slip. I reserve the right to reject you later simply by remaining silent and being compliant from this point on.”
      Mind you, if she had, that would have ended the matter rather quickly for me.

      Like

      • Context is important here. To be exact my comments were not a sweeping generaliztion about intimacy in any form of relationship. When Donald Trump gropes Miss Universe, and in the words of Trump, ‘she lets him.’ Because her silence at that moment it has been interpreted as consent by Trump. But even if she had consented he is in a position of power. Sexual assults are an abuse of power. They are not about sex.

        Like

      • I agree……….100%……context is everything. And clearly DT likes power more than sex (surely no one would be seduced in a TV studio by that act!) so, I agree once again. I may be picking nits so I’ll stop (after this) but ‘power’ is also more in the eyes of the perceived than it is in actuality. Most men, for instance, when I was a mediator, felt powerless in the separation mediations. They felt the Family Act was rigged against them. It was NOT. The courts had a bias but the Act was pretty neutral. The women felt powerless, too, if they had to rely on the man they were leaving or was leaving them. Both saw the other side as having all the cards. Automatically attributing POWER to someone rich confers more on them than they actually have. It is NOT as simple as it looks. Ergo: context is everything.

        Like

    • New York Times reports an accusation made by a women on a plane with Trump and after their meal trays were removed, Trump went for dessert by touching her breasts and groping between her thighs “like an octopus.” Trump as he said the at the last debate, “I never did the things I said I did on the tape. Just talk.

      Like

      • Even tho I detest him, almost anything said NOW is tainted by celebrity and politics. Any woman, so inclined, can allege anything….and some will be telling the truth…some will not. Did the TIMES corroborate that by finding supporting witnesses? If not, how can they go with a he–said, she-said…..?

        Like

      • Trump says he will sue but it is all hot air. He will never make a deposition because even Trump knows not to perger himself. He will make no such deposition because he has described this pattern of behaviour on tape. I agree with claim of the celebrity and politics. Trump justifies his actions because of his celebrity and it is consistent with how he exercises political power. It is authoritarian and he feel entitled to exercise personal power in a coercive manner. He said it and he did it. Sleeze, pure sleeve.

        Like

  4. Trump loves Twitter because it allows for instant gratification as does his desire for frottage. He has about 25 million social media followers that he can contact at will. Squeeze a breast or tweet at 3:00 am, they let me do that.

    Like

    • And yet Trump still refuses to release his Income Tax Statements blaming “ongoing audits delay me from making them public” which other billionaires such as Warren Buffet tweeted last night as “total lies”.
      Trump endlessly spews forth inane stats and outright lies and the gullible gobble it up…….
      Frightening if it wasnt so bizarre.

      Like

  5. Well, I do not ‘value’ as many do. Biilions of dollars does NOT make Trump worth my time, for instance. And Twitter’s perceived value does not mean a thing to me. But your opinion does. If you think it worth ‘looking at’, I will reconsider. Thanks.

    Like

  6. Dear Aldo;

    I agree with you! Like you I’m not a fan of subscribing on-line, to read opinion pieces. One of my reservations about Twitter is how it contributes to our media landscape with is its enabling of bombastic flame wars. Often used in place of logical scholarly evidence based debates. Often dripping in irony as Trump calls Hillary a liar. The pot calling the kettle black! If only Trump would flesh out his assertions but that is not possible in 140 characters.

    Like

  7. Trump gives a martyrs speech as he defends America against an international conspiracy of women fighting to stop Trump groping his way to the White House.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s