Woman who sued Donald Trump for child rape breaks her silence today 3pm PST - Polidicks

[QUOTE=J!NX;51300704]this has to be the most sexist thing I've seen in a while Unless I'm somehow just not getting it :v:[/QUOTE] It mocks people who claim women do it for "fame, glory..." because as the comic portrays none of these things happen or are positive for the person who did the claim. But if that is the most sexist thing you've seen in a while, you're living a damn good life.

[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51300715]It mocks people who claim women do it for "fame, glory..." because as the comic portrays none of these things happen or are positive for the person who did the claim. But if that is the most sexist thing you've seen in a while, you're living a damn good life.[/QUOTE] Oh I had it another way around and just didn't get the joke then

[QUOTE=Tudd;51299856]Hope you feel good voting for his enabler.[/QUOTE] hmm either vote for someone who is related to someone who assaults women, or vote for someone who bragged about assaulting women hmmmmmm

[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51300715] But if that is the most sexist thing you've seen in a while, you're living a damn good life.[/QUOTE] Tbf if the comic hand't been sarcastic in tone, it would be disgustingly sexist. Considering the fact i'm on the internet rn, It took me a few seconds to realise the comic was mocking the position instead of expressing it.

Am I the only one wondering how this always shows up during election periods? Out of all the time since 1994, why decide to bring this up just now? It just feels to me like you have headhunters working for the other candidate searching dirt on the other person and persuading these people who actually might have a hard time with this to bring this to attention and put them under a spotlight for the entire world to see. I really don't care about the shit the two candidates fling between each other, but bringing in people who might have moved on with this and then "open the wounds" really makes me think worse of the candidate deciding to go after these people and persuade them to press charges. I feel that if they haven't made anything out of this since 1994, they might have moved on by now and it's really shitty to persuade them to go through this all over again.

[QUOTE=IQ-Guldfisk;51300948]I feel that if they haven't made anything out of this since 1994, they might have moved on by now and it's really shitty to persuade them to go through this all over again.[/QUOTE] Or the people have suffered in silence all these years and welcome an opportunity to open about it now that they finally have credibility. Who knows? Since we don't really know anything, it's too easy to speculate for our own ends. Overall, opening even old cases is better than being forever silent. Of course worse than investigating them when they are fresh, but at least it gives the victims some kind of closure so they don't need to take the secrets to their grave, and hopefully deters future abuse by making a point that old deeds may come back to haunt the guilty. But yea, it's telling about flawed system for dealing with these kinds of cases if they are only reopened when they become politically relevant to outsiders. It's a difficult road but it seems western society is slowly moving towards better justice for abuse victims, and hopefully this sort of dirt-flinging never returns to politics and abuse is properly and timely investigated.

[QUOTE=Robman8908;51298515]You really think every single little thing Trump or Pence says is going to just magically happen?[/QUOTE] Presidents aren't all powerful, but they can scratch their chin the wrong way and they'd be indirectly responsible for human deaths. They still have an immense impact to the world. Even if Trump enacted decent policies while in office (he wouldn't), his rhetoric alone would alienate US allies and allow plenty of vacuum for others to step in. Even without the NATO stuff, what do you think would happen? Bush Jr. was internationally seen as a clown. What will people think of a pussy-grabber who spews much more stupid stuff on a weekly basis? Domestically, he would provoke further division, which is not something the US can afford right now. For crying out loud, there's a real reason to worry about the peaceful transition of power.

[QUOTE=fulgrim;51300843]Tbf if the comic hand't been sarcastic in tone, it would be disgustingly sexist. Considering the fact i'm on the internet rn, It took me a few seconds to realise the comic was mocking the position instead of expressing it.[/QUOTE] If internet comics are the worst things gender issues have to deal with, then I have no idea why we need feminism.

[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51301456]If internet comics [B]are the worst things gender issues have to deal with[/B], then I have no idea why we need feminism.[/QUOTE] Literally no one has said this.

[QUOTE=IQ-Guldfisk;51300948]Am I the only one wondering how this always shows up during election periods? Out of all the time since 1994, why decide to bring this up just now? It just feels to me like you have headhunters working for the other candidate searching dirt on the other person and persuading these people who actually might have a hard time with this to bring this to attention and put them under a spotlight for the entire world to see. I really don't care about the shit the two candidates fling between each other, but bringing in people who might have moved on with this and then "open the wounds" really makes me think worse of the candidate deciding to go after these people and persuade them to press charges. I feel that if they haven't made anything out of this since 1994, they might have moved on by now and it's really shitty to persuade them to go through this all over again.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=fulgrim;51298033]I made a pretty long post about this kind of thing a couple of weeks ago, let me dig it up. TL;DR: If you got raped by some super-rich asshole at a point in time where nobody took rape allegations seriously, lived with it for years thinking you couldn't do anything about it, and then suddenly you started seeing the guy getting torn apart for doing something similar to someone else- would you not also feel emboldened about speaking out?.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Vlevs;51300994]Who knows? Since we don't really know anything, it's too easy to speculate for our own ends. [/QUOTE] You know I agree with you. I am in no way trying to blame the victim here, I suppose that wasn't entirely clear in my previous post. What I am saying is this: It always seem like these sort of stories come afloat during very "risky" moments in the suspects life/career. This in itself has made me feel, and again, this is in no way based on any evidence at all. It's just a hunch I have. That there are people actively searching for someone who might have had something like this happened to them, and that strategy is pretty fucking shitty, especially if they have to persuade the victims to enter a process which will gain them attention they might not want. If the victims want this to be resolved, that is fantastic, and if crimes were committed I hope the person responsible is convicted. But, and again this is just my hunch, when something from 1994 comes afloat at a very critical time I just get the feeling it's not entirely just up to the victim but that there is someone pressuring them. Those people are the shitty ones. Not the victims, they deserve to see justice be made. So I believe you are correct, we can only really speculate about the reasoning behind this sudden reveal, and my stance on it is I hope that no one was pressured to bring this sort of affair up without them actually wanting to. If there was any sort of pressuring, it just makes me think worse of the other party (in this case being Clinton) as well as Trump for doing something like this (he sure seems the kind of person who could) and I really just want them both to persuade the voters with sound arguments with what they are planning to do and why they believe their opponent is not going to be as good of a president as themselves, instead of shit flinging like this. I believe my original post wasn't interpreted as I had intended due to the response. [QUOTE=TheBloodyNine;51301498]Quotes[/QUOTE] Same as above, we can only really speculate, but what Fulgrim is saying does make sense. Bad memories brought back really sucks and if you can do something about it why wouldn't you?

[QUOTE=rndgenerator;51301456]If internet comics are the worst things gender issues have to deal with, then I have no idea why we need feminism.[/QUOTE] What are you even trying to do here?

[QUOTE=Robman8908;51298284]C'mon, people... Tudd is bringing up Bill Clinton's shit that has plenty of proof behind it, yet you hear nothing about it and it hasn't affected him negatively in the public light at all. Hillary's e-mail scandal even has proof behind it, but nobody seems to give a shit because "Trump is a loudmouth". Everyone on this forum wanted her head when that was first showing up, but since Bernie is gone, it's an immediate u-turn with a lot of the posters here. Bernie reveals he's just as much of a pushover as any other politician, says Hillary's a great choice, and everyone jumps on board without batting an eye. There is zero proof backing the accusations against Trump at the moment, so you shouldn't even lean either way. You watch, you wait, and if there's proof, call him a rapist pig... if there is no proof, then just keep calling him a loudmouth. (For the record, I'm not even voting in this election. I don't like anyone running, and I'm not throwing a vote to someone if I don't believe in them.)[/QUOTE] to be fair they're not accused of being a serial sexual abuser let alone a sexual abuser of a child

[QUOTE=Orkel;51298481]Yea that part turned out sounding bad, but hopefully you get my point still. Trump is a massive asshole but I personally have a hard time believing such unbelievably conveniently timed accusations. Thus I won't call him a rapist until he gets slammed in court, if he does.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE] Whenever I hear someone go , “But why now? Why all these women now?” Let me use my experience and simple rational logic to explain WHY NOW. I was at a bar one night talking to an older man, joking, drinking, having a conversation. He reaches out and grabs and squeezes my breasts. I back up and react. Say “What the fuck?” He says, “I thought you just said I could”. With deep confusion, I say, “Uhh, what?! No, I didn’t.” He smiles a shit-eating grin and says, “Oh, I thought you did”. I slink away grossed out and embarrassed. He laughs. I knew there wasn’t anything real I could do. Complain to the bar maybe? Start a fight? Be attacked more? Retaliated against? Nah. I’d rather tell my girlfriend, commiserate, stay safe and go home. Nothing would happen to this guy. This was maybe 7-8 years ago, and yes I STILL remember it. Had this man been famous, I would have remember him, his name, who he was. I would ALWAYS remember. Now let’s say, this man pops up on TV as a major party candidate running in the primaries... It would burn me up, send me back to the moment. Do I want to throw this “wild” accusation out of the blue just because I see him? Do I want to open up my life to total scrutiny and attack? But what could I, a nobody with no “proof” or platform do? Nothing. Be angry. Vote against him. Now lets say this guy becomes the party’s candidate. He gets through debates and becomes increasingly likely to become our president. Then let’s say, a video comes out, with him describing doing exactly what he did to me... with his own words? Then he denies it. Wow, this guy is being exposed. And I can speak up to confirm this. My words have merit now. I can tell people this was my experience. It happened to me. It would be really scary to take that first step. But then, I hear other women come out. They speak of their own stories that have stuck with them for 1,5, 10, 20 years. Now I feel safe. I have others backing me up. I’m not alone. I speak up. We have a chance to expose this person. We have a chance to really make a change. And I’m no longer alone. THAT is why I speak up now.[/QUOTE] I read this elsewhere, I keep reposting it here. It's valid.

[QUOTE=Robman8908;51298284]C'mon, people... Tudd is bringing up Bill Clinton's shit that has plenty of proof behind it, yet you hear nothing about it and it hasn't affected him negatively in the public light at all. Hillary's e-mail scandal even has proof behind it, but nobody seems to give a shit because "Trump is a loudmouth". Everyone on this forum wanted her head when that was first showing up, but since Bernie is gone, it's an immediate u-turn with a lot of the posters here. Bernie reveals he's just as much of a pushover as any other politician, says Hillary's a great choice, and everyone jumps on board without batting an eye. There is zero proof backing the accusations against Trump at the moment, so you shouldn't even lean either way. You watch, you wait, and if there's proof, call him a rapist pig... if there is no proof, then just keep calling him a loudmouth. (For the record, I'm not even voting in this election. I don't like anyone running, and I'm not throwing a vote to someone if I don't believe in them.)[/QUOTE] Just an FYI: Bernie himself went on record to say that he only supported Clinton because it meant that Trump won't get elected. He also pleaded with the voters to not throw their votes away to support Trump instead. He ensured that many of the policies he wanted to implement are taken up as part of Clinton's manifesto, and that in and of itself is a good thing. This way, he accomplished something meaningful instead of being hardheaded and not making compromises, which by the way, is how any good politician must base their career around - sometimes you have to make a compromise if you can't get exactly what you want. Further, he could not have not endorsed Clinton without seeing the democrats fracture and trust, both intra-party as well as among the voters, would be eroded seriously. It's also traditional that any candidate who loses the prelims should endorse the winner and official candidate. If you shifted allegiances from Bernie to Trump for its own sake without critically analyzing both their platforms, you never supported Bernie at all, only a vague belief that he'd 'do something about the flawed, or in their own words, deeply corrupt, system.' Being against the establishment for its own sake without valid reasons, or understanding that extreme interpretations of your beliefs isn't going to cut it whether you're a democrat or a republican, is just being edgy for its own sake, I'm sorry but there's no other way of putting it. It leans more towards anarchy than being supportive of any system of beliefs. Honestly, with the way he behaves, it's not hard to form a conclusion that there might be some truth to the accusations leveled against him. I mean, he's got recorded ties to the Mafia, for crying out loud. While he has been questioned about these ties, nothing has come of them, god knows why, but that doesn't absolve him or prove his innocence about anything. The guy has so much dirt on him that even if some of it happens to be false or trumped up (lol) the majority of it has at least some basis in fact.

[QUOTE=IQ-Guldfisk;51301593] I believe my original post wasn't interpreted as I had intended due to the response. [/QUOTE] Thanks for clarification. No disagreement here.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;51303437]I read this elsewhere, I keep reposting it here. It's valid.[/QUOTE] Also, I heard radio show a few days back called "The Police Report" - basically they talk about crime. Kinda on a side note they talked about how crime and perception of crime has changed over time, and one thing stuck with me. It was a statistic about what people interpret as rape - people were asked the same question back in the late 60's (think it was '67), early 80's and then in 2013 (or thereabouts). The scenario goes like this; a man invites a lady out for dinner, and then afterwards they go back to his place and start kissing. Later he tries to remove her panties, at which points she stops him and tells him no. He then slaps her in the face a couple of times and proceed to have sex with her. Now 95% of Danes in 2013 apparently agree that this is rape. But back in the late 60's only something like [I]ten[/I] percent agreed that this was rape and illegal. You kinda forget how much things have changed, but they have [I]clearly[/I] changed a whole lot.

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;51303562]Also, I heard radio show a few days back called "The Police Report" - basically they talk about crime. Kinda on a side note they talked about how crime and perception of crime has changed over time, and one thing stuck with me. It was a statistic about what people interpret as rape - people were asked the same question back in the late 60's (think it was '67), early 80's and then in 2013 (or thereabouts). The scenario goes like this; a man invites a lady out for dinner, and then afterwards they go back to his place and start kissing. Later he tries to remove her panties, at which points she stops him and tells him no. He then slaps her in the face a couple of times and proceed to have sex with her. Now 95% of Danes in 2013 apparently agree that this is rape. But back in the late 60's only something like [I]ten[/I] percent agreed that this was rape and illegal. You kinda forget how much things have changed, but they have [I]clearly[/I] changed a whole lot.[/QUOTE] Yeah I hear of cases 10 or 20 years ago about women being subject to assault but they internalize it rather than tell anyone. Because society has a habit of blaming the victim.