Senator Al Franken accused of unwanted kissing/groping

Datchery said:

I wasn't a fan of Franken before this, and think his behavior was certainly inappropriate. But as all these accusations come out, I think we need to recognize that there is a sliding scale of badness, and not all behavior deserves the same response.Let's set aside criminal penalties, since even some of the worst of these incidents are outside the statute of limitations, and the legal burden of proof makes sexual crimes hard to convict on anyway.

Some of these people should never work in their chosen fields again, and to be personae non grata in public life altogether.

Some should have a nice long time out from Hollywood/politics, with all of the associated financial and professional consequences, but might be worthy of being given another chance in time. That doesn't mean they can or should ever get back to the same level of fame or respect, but IMO a total and permanent blackballing may be excessive.

Some have behaved inappropriately and need to apologize, but should be allowed to continue with their careers - albeit, in some cases, with diminished stature and opportunities.

In the case of those no longer active in public life -- or even deceased -- some charges are serious enough to require a profound reassessment of their legacy, and some can be acknowledged as a blot without radically undermining an entire body of work.

To me, Franken's actions -- and even if, as I suspect, a few more women come forward with similar stories -- falls in the third category. He behaved badly and should be criticized. I think this should put a damper on any presidential ambitions he may have had, and, depending on if and how many more women come forward, should seriously reduce his chances of ascending to other positions of power (cabinet position, majority/minority leader, etc). He should be formally censured. But if nothing worse than this comes out, I don't think he needs to resign.

It isn't minimizing victim's experiences to acknowledge that some wrongs are more serious than other wrongs, and should be treated accordingly. Rape is worse than pleasuring oneself in front of a woman is worse than squeezing a woman's rear.

In addition, there's a difference in refusing to believe any woman (all of the accusers are lying! Its a conspiracy!) and not automatically choosing to believe every aspect of every victim's account. In this case, it is possible that neither Franken nor his accuser has an entirely accurate or unbiased memory of quite how far over the line Franken's behavior was while rehearsing the skit.

Click to expand...

Datchery said:

I wasn't a fan of Franken before this, and think his behavior was certainly inappropriate. But as all these accusations come out, I think we need to recognize that there is a sliding scale of badness, and not all behavior deserves the same response.Let's set aside criminal penalties, since even some of the worst of these incidents are outside the statute of limitations, and the legal burden of proof makes sexual crimes hard to convict on anyway.

Some of these people should never work in their chosen fields again, and to be personae non grata in public life altogether.

Some should have a nice long time out from Hollywood/politics, with all of the associated financial and professional consequences, but might be worthy of being given another chance in time. That doesn't mean they can or should ever get back to the same level of fame or respect, but IMO a total and permanent blackballing may be excessive.

Some have behaved inappropriately and need to apologize, but should be allowed to continue with their careers - albeit, in some cases, with diminished stature and opportunities.

In the case of those no longer active in public life -- or even deceased -- some charges are serious enough to require a profound reassessment of their legacy, and some can be acknowledged as a blot without radically undermining an entire body of work.

To me, Franken's actions -- and even if, as I suspect, a few more women come forward with similar stories -- falls in the third category. He behaved badly and should be criticized. I think this should put a damper on any presidential ambitions he may have had, and, depending on if and how many more women come forward, should seriously reduce his chances of ascending to other positions of power (cabinet position, majority/minority leader, etc). He should be formally censured. But if nothing worse than this comes out, I don't think he needs to resign.

It isn't minimizing victim's experiences to acknowledge that some wrongs are more serious than other wrongs, and should be treated accordingly. Rape is worse than pleasuring oneself in front of a woman is worse than squeezing a woman's rear.

In addition, there's a difference in refusing to believe any woman (all of the accusers are lying! Its a conspiracy!) and not automatically choosing to believe every aspect of every victim's account. In this case, it is possible that neither Franken nor his accuser has an entirely accurate or unbiased memory of quite how far over the line Franken's behavior was while rehearsing the skit.

Click to expand...

Hope4More said:

I agree completely that there is a spectrum of "bad" behaviors, and IMO those distinctions are largely not being made in the recent avalanche of related news in the MSM.

What a waste of an opportunity, especially when the conversation devolves into defensive & accusatory tribal politics.

In AF's case, I think both things are true: that he thought taking that photo was funny, and that she had every right to feel angry and violated that he'd done so. I think calling what he did "molestation" is an unhelpful exaggeration. That pic was taken by some one else, in plain view of others (none of whom seem to have objected). There was nothing furtive about it.

What I find most objectionable is that AF thought making a show of groping a woman was funny, that he was enabled by whoever it was that took the photo, and that nobody in that public place stood up for her. What happened was definitely not just about AF.

Click to expand...

All of these stories — Harvey Weinstein, Louis C.K., Roy Moore, James Toback, Brett Ratner, Andy Dick, Donald Trump’s “grab ’em by the p----” — are rooted in the same inclination to treat women as props.

Disposable, interchangeable, optional props — here in service of the real deal (the men) and, if not properly humiliated, in danger of forgetting their place.

Comedy, Franken’s pre-Senate home, is a boys club. We’ve been reminded of this repeatedly since sexual harassment allegations started swirling around other comedians.

So are Hollywood, politics, the workplace, the mall ... the world?

Click to expand...

Leeann Tweeden, the LA radio host who came forward with sexual misconduct allegations against Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) Thursday, said she didn’t share her story to lead Franken to resign from Congress.

“That’s not my call. I didn’t do this to have him step down. I think Al Franken does a lot of good things in the Senate, you know, I think that’s for the people of Minnesota to decide,” Tweeden said on Good Morning America Friday. “I’m not calling for him to step down, that was never my intention. … I just wanted him to understand what he did was wrong.”

Click to expand...

Wyle_E_Coyote said:

The forced kiss was certainly assault. The picture, IMO, should be viewed in light of what happened prior.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

anonypotomous said:

Because women have allowed it. Hopefully this stops now.

Click to expand...

Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but generally falls into one of these categories:

1. Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Intent to cause physical injury is not required, and physical injury does not need to result. So defined in tort law and the criminal statutes of some states.

2. With the intent to cause physical injury, making another person reasonably apprehend an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Essentially, an attempted battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states.

3. With the intent to cause physical injury, actually causing such injury to another person. Essentially, the same as a battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states, and so understood in popular usage.

Apprehension v. Fear

In this context, "apprehension" does not mean "fear." Rather, to experience apprehension, the victim must believe that the tortfeasor's conduct will result in imminent harmful or offensive contact unless it is somehow otherwise prevented. It isn't necessary that the victim believes the conduct will be effective in making such contact, only that he believes the conduct is capable of making such contact.

Click to expand...

Hope4More said:

I wouldn't call the forced kiss an "assault." Even if what happened went exactly like she claims it did (that AF deliberately manipulated her into that encounter) (in front of numerous witnesses) (and given Stone's involvement, there is some room for doubt), what I'd call it is AF exercising very poor judgement & a sense of entitlement & and either an obliviousness or an indifference to his accuser's feelings.

My question is how she responded to that kiss. In a better world, if she felt then what she now says she felt, she would have immediately told AF he was completely out of bounds & demanded an apology from him. There wouldn't have been a photo had she done that.

That isn't victim-blaming, but a statement of fact. What needs to change isn't just men's knowledge of what is and isn't respectful and appropriate, but also women feeling empowered enough to speak up. Both.

Click to expand...

Hope4More said:

I wouldn't call the forced kiss an "assault." Even if what happened went exactly like she claims it did (that AF deliberately manipulated her into that encounter) (in front of numerous witnesses) (and given Stone's involvement, there is some room for doubt), what I'd call it is AF exercising very poor judgement & a sense of entitlement & and either an obliviousness or an indifference to his accuser's feelings.

My question is how she responded to that kiss. In a better world, if she felt then what she now says she felt, she would have immediately told AF he was completely out of bounds & demanded an apology from him. There wouldn't have been a photo had she done that.

That isn't victim--blaming, but a statement of fact. What needs to change isn't just men's knowledge of what is and isn't respectful and appropriate, but also women feeling empowered enough to speak up. Both.

Click to expand...

EuTuCroquet? said:

Respectfully, victims don't "allow" assault to happen. Legally, assault is what happened when Franken grabbed, forcefully kissed, touched and grabbed women. As I'm sure we're all seeing now, this behavior is all too common from all too many people in positions of power.

Women are grabbed and assaulted because they're sex objects — because men feel entitled to do it. That's assault. Maybe battery. I'm assuming "women allowed it" might mean "because women didn't go to the cops." But to be completely honest here, we don't know what they did as far as reporting it, at least in most cases in the MSM right now. Because Franken is/was a comedian, and comedy has long been a boys' club, and grabbing and touching "objects" (women) without their consent was considered hi-lar-i-ous. IMO.

We probably can assume, though, that they at least talked to and warned each other. They are victims. They didn't "allow" this to happen to them.

Women played along because they didn't want to be considered "hysterical b-tches." To do so would jeopardize their own careers and the potential of other women to "make it" in that business. I bet, like many in such situations where there are similar abuses of power, most had to "accept" that's just the way it is: Put up, shut up, deal with it or leave. There was no other "reasonable" recourse.

Those were the rules. I hope they're changing for the better!!

Click to expand...

Hope4More said:

FWIW- AF had a military minder/escort for the entire time now being discussed. That person has come forward to say that he was always with AF, even in the bathroom, that it was his job to prevent/ report any inappropriate behavior by AF, and that he never witnessed AF acting inappropriately in any way.

Click to expand...

PaulR said:

Respectfully, I don't think those have been "the rules" for a very long time. Certainly this wasn't acceptable when the photograph was taken. I am younger than Franken but have never been under the impression that what he did to this woman was ever acceptable in any way, even for laughs. Because frankly it isn't very funny.

Click to expand...