Discussion » Questions » Current Events and News » Isn't it bizarre how our outlook changes when the person we admire winds up having some weird sexual history? They are toast.

Isn't it bizarre how our outlook changes when the person we admire winds up having some weird sexual history? They are toast.

Posted - February 22, 2019

Responses


  • Lol, what are you on about now?? :)
      February 22, 2019 9:19 AM MST
    2

  • 46117
    I'm watching a lot of news.  It seems like the best way to ruin someone is call them out on their sexual history.

    And, as much as I want to say OH THAT'S in the past.... it really is not.  It colors everything you think about them forever.

    There was a holy man in the 70's that was amazing. He was the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi who was accused by Mia Farrow of groping her.

    I like Mia Farrow.  She is an amazing woman. It is hard for me to not believe her.  She accused this Saint in India of groping her and that accusation stayed with him until the day he died.

    I have read so much good about him, so much, but I cannot shake that accusation out of my head.

    Mia Farrow is not nuts and the Maharishi is no molester.   

    But every time I hear his name I think he is.
      February 22, 2019 9:42 AM MST
    2

  • Oh okay news, gotcha. I was thinking about that whole Richard Gere gerbil fiasco from years ago when read your post lol. 
      February 22, 2019 9:51 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    That's EXACTLY MY POINT.  That didn't even happen.  But who doesn't remember that?
      February 22, 2019 9:52 AM MST
    1

  • Your point is correct, yes Lol. This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at February 22, 2019 9:53 AM MST
      February 22, 2019 9:53 AM MST
    0

  • 7939
    That didn't happen? LMAO
      February 22, 2019 10:04 AM MST
    1

  • Lol, I always thought it did...it ruined pretty woman for me O_o
      February 22, 2019 10:05 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    Well he never talked about it.  Proving the point, you are damned either way.
      February 22, 2019 10:46 AM MST
    1

  • 7939
    Umm... Well, I don't consider rape to be a "weird sexual history." It's a crime. I take allegations with a grain of salt, but when someone is of questionable morals or has a history of very poor decisions, yeah, they are toast. 

    Beyond that, I really don't care what a person does with him or herself and other consenting adults. If he liked to send dirty selfies to women while wearing trash bags and eating tilde sandwiches, it wouldn't change my view of him in a leadership role. 
      February 22, 2019 9:26 AM MST
    6

  • 46117
    A weird sexual history is a sexual history that is abarant.  (sp)  That is what weird meant in this context.  Crime is absolutely an issue regarding sexual behavior.

    I am not talking about what weirdos do in their own bedrooms.  I am talking about accusing people in the media.  

    You are accused?   You are always guilty in the eyes of public opinion.   Even if you are innocent.


    OH, BTW?  Kavanaugh is NOT innocent.
      February 22, 2019 9:47 AM MST
    0

  • 7939
    You used Kavanaugh's picture though, which kind of suggests his situation is what you meant by weird. 
      February 22, 2019 10:03 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    I know.  He was the first lying predator I found but it confuses the message I am sending.    It looks like I am making him a martyr.   And it really has nothing to do with my point, does it?  
      February 22, 2019 10:21 AM MST
    0

  • 46117
    I should have used Bill   Clinton.   
      February 22, 2019 10:47 AM MST
    1

  • 19937
    FYI - aberrant
      February 22, 2019 11:46 AM MST
    2

  • "Weird sexual history" doesn't have to mean they are a terrible human being . I think my interest would be piqued more by the "Weird sexual history" pile as opposed to the "Vanilla AF sexual history" pile. 
      February 22, 2019 10:17 AM MST
    2

  • 46117
    I know.  I should have said it differently.  I just assume everyone knows me and what I mean.  I have to stop that.  

    I am trying to point out that all we need to do is point a finger and the person is damned for good, and I wound up putting Kavanaugh on the question like I am defending him.  

    He is GUILTY as sin. I just didn't use a good pic.  


    Sadly this is a very good pic of what I really meant.




    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at February 22, 2019 5:43 PM MST
      February 22, 2019 10:22 AM MST
    3

  • 19937
    With the possible exception of Monica Lewinsky, weren't the women who accused Clinton of misbehaving all adults who could have said, "No?"  
      February 22, 2019 11:49 AM MST
    1

  • 46117
    He seduced them.   That is a predatory action. Paula Jones?  I'm not sure what happened there.  Jennifer Flowers was a good example of your description.  

    He sexually harassed Paula Jones.  Let me find something for you.


    and me.  I just don't remember the details.  But that stigma lives with him still.   I think he was guilty as hell.  I wish it were not true, trust me.  He was a victim himself.  A victim of times that were not that solid in their conviction of what is sexually appropriate.  He knew he could get away with it.  That is the bottom line and he did not consider the feelings of the intended lust object.

    1994

    Paula Jones accuses Bill Clinton of sexual harassment

    Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state clerk, files suit against President Bill Clinton in the federal court in Little Rock, Arkansas, on this day in 1994, asking for $700,000 in damages.

    Jones claimed that Clinton, while governor of Arkansas, sexually harassed her and then defamed her after she went public with her accusations. The following August, Clinton’s lawyers filed a motion to dismiss Jones’ suit citing presidential immunity. The federal district judge ruled that Clinton could not stand trial until leaving office, but that the investigation into Jones’ allegations could proceed. Jones appealed and in 1996 won the right to proceed to trial in the Supreme Court; Clinton then filed a request to delay the trial until he left office. The timing of the decision, which coincided with the November 1996 presidential election, bought Clinton a reprieve.

    The Paula Jones case was one of four major scandals that coalesced to threaten Clinton’s second term. While working on the Paula Jones investigation, independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr uncovered Clinton’s alleged affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Starr was also pursuing ongoing investigations into allegedly illegal real-estate deals made by the Clintons (known as the Whitewater scandal) and a dispute concerning allegations of cronyism in the firing of workers at the White House travel agency. When questioned about the Lewinksy affair, the president was decidedly less than forthcoming, leading to charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. Though Democratic leaders preferred to censure the president, Congress began the impeachment process against Clinton in 1998; a divided House of Representatives impeached him on December 19. The issue then passed to the Senate, where after a 5-week trial, he was acquitted.

     
    This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at February 22, 2019 12:01 PM MST
      February 22, 2019 11:52 AM MST
    0

  • 19937
    Basically, Paula Jones claimed Clinton harassed her while he was governor of Arkansas.  Lewinsky, to my knowledge, never sued Clinton - she just took her lumps.  There were three or four other women who claimed he harassed them and one who claimed he raped her.  I am in no way excusing Clinton's behavior.  Jones was a government employee and I would imagine she could have asked to be transferred to another agency although she shouldn't have had to do that.  Same for the other women.  Lewinsky admittedly was a consensual participant.  Clinton took advantage of her youth and inexperience and that was predatory.  Bear in mind that the Senate never convicted Clinton of anything, but that doesn't mean Clinton was without guilt.  
      February 22, 2019 12:54 PM MST
    0