Quote:You keep saying absolve when there is no reason to absolve them from anything. But yeah sure I suppose there's always a small possibility that when a guy says a women let him do something that he may in fact be lieing.
In the same way when my girlfriend comes back with the shopping theres a small possibility that she may in fact have stolen it all.
This is a classic Kotite debate. Step 1) Come out all guns blazing opposing one particular area. Step 2) Insert supposed superior knowledge based on personal experience and relationships. Step 3) Change argument based on if you seem to be losing or not. Step 4) Ask vague open ended questions and argue about the semantics of them. Step 5) Flail around in an attempt to win some kind battle in the debate. Rinse and repeat.
I'm not claiming any superior knowledge and I am not making a case whoever had their crotch pet by Trump did not do so willingly. I will say I don't know anyone who would even think about touching a woman's crotch they just met without the smallest sign there is consent, but that's irrelevant.
I am pointing out the blanket excuse that just because Trump (or any man) SAYS that a woman let them do whatever to them does not make it necessarily so. Bunnie floated the argument he said that the women let him do that, therefore what is the big deal. As you finally admit, just because he says it was consensual does not necessarily make it true. To make a blanket excuse "he says" it was all cool without getting any additional detail of what actually took place and dismissing the possibility many, some or one of these women did not want to be touched is insane. You cannot just absolve someone of any potential wrongdoing by simply getting one side of the story. That is basic logic. But that is the argument which was posed. And where Trump is concerned, logic goes out the window. Was that really so hard?
Quote:I'm not claiming any superior knowledge and I am not making a case whoever had their crotch pet by Trump did not do so willingly. I will say I don't know anyone who would even think about touching a woman's crotch they just met without the smallest sign there is consent, but that's irrelevant.
I am pointing out the blanket excuse that just because Trump (or any man) SAYS that a woman let them do whatever to them does not make it necessarily so. Bunnie floated the argument he said that the women let him do that, therefore what is the big deal. As you finally admit, just because he says it was consensual does not necessarily make it true. To make a blanket excuse "he says" it was all cool without getting any additional detail of what actually took place and dismissing the possibility many, some or one of these women did not want to be touched is insane. You cannot just absolve someone of any potential wrongdoing by simply getting one side of the story. That is basic logic. But that is the argument which was posed. And where Trump is concerned, logic goes out the window. Was that really so hard?
So in other words, this whole thing is much ado about nothing.
Either Trump is lying about sexual assault or he has committed it.
So he's either a weirdo or a creep. Time for A bit of Radiohead
Radiohead?
Steel Panther, baby. Trump n Roll
Quote:Usually you do a mega long rant to something not even half as disrespectful.
You are offended by words, others by sexual assault and boasting not the words isolated.
Brits are better trained however.
That's what they said in 1776 too, how did that turn out. (Sorry I just couldn't resist) :thumbsup:
Quote:I'm not claiming any superior knowledge and I am not making a case whoever had their crotch pet by Trump did not do so willingly. I will say I don't know anyone who would even think about touching a woman's crotch they just met without the smallest sign there is consent, but that's irrelevant.
I am pointing out the blanket excuse that just because Trump (or any man) SAYS that a woman let them do whatever to them does not make it necessarily so. Bunnie floated the argument he said that the women let him do that, therefore what is the big deal. As you finally admit, just because he says it was consensual does not necessarily make it true. To make a blanket excuse "he says" it was all cool without getting any additional detail of what actually took place and dismissing the possibility many, some or one of these women did not want to be touched is insane. You cannot just absolve someone of any potential wrongdoing by simply getting one side of the story. That is basic logic. But that is the argument which was posed. And where Trump is concerned, logic goes out the window. Was that really so hard?
Glad you agree with the rest of the steps.
I see we are in Step 5 at the moment.
The problem with this argument is that you are presuming guilt when there is no evidence or reason to do so. All I admitted was that there is always a small possibility that people lie. That is not some ground breaking admission you have got, more so common sense that is universally known. To make the claim that someone is guilty of wrong doing based on a joke is insane, its also insane to talk about them needing to be absolved when there is 0 reasons for them to be guilty.
I'm sorry Kotite but you are flailing around like a fish in a balloon at the moment.
Quote:So in other words, this whole thing is much ado about nothing.
Typical drive by post.. maybe go back a few pages.
Quote:If people think the last congress was a do nothing congress with the fight and animosity with Obama, just think of it with Trump, who has alienated both sides.
The speaker of the house practically said, every candidate for himself. The divide is huge. I can't imagine anything getting done .
You say that like it is a bad thing. Every time the two side agree on something you and I lose a little freedom.
Quote:Glad you agree with the rest of the steps.
I see we are in Step 5 at the moment.
The problem with this argument is that you are presuming guilt when there is no evidence or reason to do so. All I admitted was that there is always a small possibility that people lie. That is not some ground breaking admission you have got, more so common sense that is universally known. To make the claim that someone is guilty of wrong doing based on a joke is insane, its also insane to talk about them needing to be absolved when there is 0 reasons for them to be guilty.
I'm sorry Kotite but you are flailing around like a fish in a balloon at the moment.
I'm not presuming anything at all.. (I swear I have said this before ten times). I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things. That is the blanket excuse Bunnie floated. The next step when you make a conclusion like that is to blame any woman who claims to have been victimized. "The man says she let him" therefore if any woman says different she is after something. Because getting your crotch pet by someone you just met is so commonplace.
Quote:Either Trump is lying about sexual assault or he has committed it.
So he's either a weirdo or a creep. Time for A bit of Radiohead
Because he said something in "private" several years ago. Got it.
Quote:You say that like it is a bad thing. Every time the two side agree on something you and I lose a little freedom.
And a hit in the pocketbook.
George Carlin said it best. It's a huge game, and we're not in it. The system is rigged folks. Big money owns it. The politicians are just pawns.
Quote:I'm not presuming anything at all.. (I swear I have said this before ten times). I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things. That is the blanket excuse Bunnie floated. The next step when you make a conclusion like that is to blame any woman who claims to have been victimized. "The man says she let him" therefore if any woman says different she is after something. Because getting your crotch pet by someone you just met is so commonplace.
So Trump brags or is joking around with another man in "typical locker room banter" about women over 10 years ago is really relevant? You need to let it go. Seriously... you are so triggered over this.
Quote:That's what they said in 1776 too, how did that turn out. (Sorry I just couldn't resist) :thumbsup:
With your candidates I'd be regretting the whole getting rid of the Brits thing.
Quote:With your candidates I'd be regretting the whole getting rid of the Brits thing.
We don't. The Brits are a mess right now.
Quote:My fraternity house was on campus... Maybe that's why?
Either way, I can attest that no man, or boy, I've been around ever said, "They let you do it" because of your money, wealth, power, or social status...
I've heard alot of talk about how hot a particular girl is, I've even been in discussion with what a particular girl or group of girls are like behind closed doors...
But never have I ever heard a discussion where guys were talking about attacking a woman without her consent.
That's what you're defending. And it's really sad...
Anchor...Are you sure that was a frat you were in? Dude the was the attitude of just about every rich legacy frat boy I ran into.
Quote:So Trump brags or is joking around with another man in "typical locker room banter" about women over 10 years ago is really relevant? You need to let it go. Seriously... you are so triggered over this.
No donkey. I could care less about Trump. I was angered at the logic employed to pose an argument that simply because he said an act was consensual it must be the case. That is what was posed. And it is manure. People will go to any length to justify anything he says or does. The excuse floated makes a conclusion based on hearsay without knowing any details of the incident. That is what I find upsetting.
Quote:I'm not presuming anything at all.. (I swear I have said this before ten times). I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things. That is the blanket excuse Bunnie floated. The next step when you make a conclusion like that is to blame any woman who claims to have been victimized. "The man says she let him" therefore if any woman says different she is after something. Because getting your crotch pet by someone you just met is so commonplace.
You are presuming an attempt at humour to be literal, when you have already that it shouldn't be done.
"I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things."
So which do you think is more likely? That Trumps attempt at humour was simply an attempt at humour and to show off/big himself off to a friend in a light hearted conversation OR that what Trump said is an admission of guilt and that there are tons of women out there who have been assaulted in that manner but havn't done anything about it? Bear in mind that most women Trumps meets are famous/rich/influential.
Stage 5 of Kotites debate cycle is in full flow. I predict he will find faults with my post instead of answering a simple question.
Quote:You are presuming an attempt at humour to be literal, when you have already that it shouldn't be done.
"I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things."
So which do you think is more likely? That Trumps attempt at humour was simply an attempt at humour and to show off/big himself off to a friend in a light hearted conversation OR that what Trump said is an admission of guilt and that there are tons of women out there who have been assaulted in that manner but havn't done anything about it? Bear in mind that most women Trumps meets are famous/rich/influential.
For the love of God.. you are thick. I do not care about whether or not Trump is being truthful. I do not care if he was making a joke.
I do care that there is a blanket excuse that was made which does not accept the possibility the incident was not consensual simply because one person in the incident (it could be any incident) says it was. You cannot absolve a person from the possibility of wrongdoing simply by getting their version of events. Period.
This is not about humor or Trump.
Quote:I'm not presuming anything at all.. (I swear I have said this before ten times). I am emphatically rejecting the asinine notion that Trump could not have possibly done anything wrong because he said these women let him do these things. That is the blanket excuse Bunnie floated. The next step when you make a conclusion like that is to blame any woman who claims to have been victimized. "The man says she let him" therefore if any woman says different she is after something. Because getting your crotch pet by someone you just met is so commonplace.
Dear God, Please stop.
I never said he was absolved of anything he did wrong because he "said" they let him. I said, several times now, that if these women willingly let him do any of those things, it wasn't sexual assault!! That's when you went on your little tirade about how no woman would let him touch her unless she was lacking morals and something stupid about Jabba the Hutt.