• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 20:38
CEST 02:38
KST 09:38
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall10HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation12$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced6Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles6[BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China9Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL66
StarCraft 2
General
Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation TL Team Map Contest #4: Winners Weekly Cups (June 30 - July 6): Classic Doubles The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
$25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ ASL20 Preliminary Maps [G] Progamer Settings [ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall SC uni coach streams logging into betting site
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET CSL Xiamen International Invitational
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Positive Thoughts on Setting Up a Dual-Caliber FX
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Summer Games Done Quick 2025! Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 550 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2038

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-06-16 22:03:24
June 16 2015 22:02 GMT
#40741
On June 17 2015 06:22 Stratos_speAr wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 06:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:47 Stratos_speAr wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:46 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:

You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.


I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"

This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.

I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.

The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.


Well, since I just edited my post to demonstrate an explicit quote showing you writing off the issue, you might want to check yourself.

Also, just because our culture is more female friendly than others doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality.

And I never said "rape epidemic" anywhere here, but you've mentioned in multiple times and tried to attribute it to me. Another blatant attempt by you to falsely portray my view points so you can argue against them.

You gonna ever answer for that, or just shift the goal posts and ignore it so you don't have to own up to your intellectual dishonesty?

I tried to attribute the 'rape epidemic' narrative to you because when I cited it, you seemed to defend it. I said that the norm people were outraged over was phantom, and you quickly called me a liar. I cited the 'rape epidemic' narrative and you told me my head was in the sand.

I'm not sure what 'true equality' is supposed to be. If you mean equality of opportunity I'm on board and think we can do more for both men and women, but I disagree with the feminist notion that we need some sort of parity of outcomes. And I point to female friendly because there is now plenty of systemic bias against men. It is not as if we live in a society where only men have advantages.


I can agree with most of this, to an extent. I agree that we should strive for equality of opportunity and that there are distinct disadvantages that men have in society.

My problem with your comments is that you quickly jumped to a conclusion about what I believed and then argued against that stock character. I never defended the "epidemic" idea. I was attacking your comments that insinuated that there was never a real problem with sexual assault in our society, which is why I mentioned your "head being in the sand".

Most everyone agrees with equality of opportunity. The difference is where you think that some people are arguing for equality of outcome, when they think differently. I haven't talked to very many feminists (or liberals in general) that want equality of outcome. The difference seems to be that you (and most conservatives) have different ideas about how to achieve equality of opportunity when compared to how your average liberal thinks we can achieve that.

I also think that you're exaggerating how often men have a disadvantage compared to women. Yes, there are certainly issues where men are at a disadvantage, and it really grinds my gears when feminists just dismiss them (e.g. men having to sign up for the draft but not women, women having a massive advantage in child custody battles just by virtue of being the mother, men being far more likely to be sentenced to prison time, men being pigeon-holed into "masculine" roles, etc.), but it's not like society has suddenly swung to the point where women have just as many areas in life where they get an advantage over men. The world has been male-dominated in pretty much every society for pretty much all of human history. It's not like we magically turned that around in the last 30 years. There's still work to do.

I don't think I said that there was never, in the entire course of human history, a real problem with sexual assault. My comments were that there wasn't a need when the latest social movement kicked in. Again, I think the statistics bear that out.

I think there is absolutely a demand for equality of outcomes. If you look at the 'more women in STEM' push, the rhetoric may very well be that equal opportunity is demanded and that 'discrimination' is cited as a barrier. But the reality is that they are asking for more equality in outcomes, since outcomes is the primary factual basis for the entire push. Women have special access to grants and are often given hiring preferences to get them into those fields and yet since a difference in outcomes remains, the push continues. Moreover, and I think tellingly, in science fields where women are the majority there doesn't seem to be a concern.

To your list of female advantages I'll add female over-representation in college, a bias towards higher grades for girls over boys in school, women control the majority of household spending, men are more likely to be homeless (and particularly die while homeless), less likely to receive domestic abuse support and that men are far more likely than women to die on the job. However I do not think that there's any good way to determine in all this which sex has a total advantage over the other (edit: as some men's rights groups might claim). Maybe women are more disadvantaged, but determining that seems far too messy and subjective for my taste.

As long as people are pushing for equality of opportunity I'm happy, but I from my perspective feminists are pushing for inequality of opportunity and equality in outcomes where women aren't already advantaged. It all seems very, very biased.
Mercy13
Profile Joined January 2011
United States718 Posts
June 16 2015 22:05 GMT
#40742
On June 17 2015 06:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.


People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.

Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.


I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.


Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.

If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.


I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".


Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.


I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.

I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.

I am not just talking about college campuses.

I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.

This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).

What happened in 1993 is a red herring. We're talking about the last decade or so. If a woman had a hard time getting justice while married in 1993, that's a shame, but it doesn't mean that women have a hard time getting justice while unmarried and on campus.

I'll also point out that many consider a woman having non-consentual sex with a man to not be rape (no penetration of the man) and that the man in the video could have been the one who was actually sexually assaulted.

As for society being dismissive of rape allegations I'd have to see figures on that. But bear in mind that false rape accusations do exist, and that society should be skeptical when it comes to any accusation.

Real victim blaming shouldn't happen, but what is classified as victim blaming has gone too far. 'Don't walk alone in dark alley' sounds like good advice for both men and women!

What I've written off is the need for a new social crusade. Rape and sexual assault have been on the decline. Moreover, the new social crusade has relied heavily on false statistics and has pushed for the new campus rules that you agree have gone too far. I really don't think it was necessary and I think the facts bear out my opinion.


Here you go!

Findings from the interviews revealed that detectives had two approaches to rape victims:
―innocent until proven guilty‖ and ―guilty until proven innocent.‖ The innocent until
proven guilty approach is characterized by: (1) a passion for working sex crimes; (2)
engaging the victim as an ally in the investigation; (3) expecting victim inconsistencies
based partially on extant law enforcement protocols and trauma-related factors; (4)
assertions that false reports are rare; (5) knowledge of the dynamics related to delayed
reporting; (5) a belief that cases involving alcohol, drugs, or prior/initially consensual sex
are serious cases and occur with more frequency than stranger rape; and (6) frustration
that departmental leadership does not take sexual assault as seriously as homicide (this
was emphasized more by LAPD detectives).
In contrast, the guilty until proven innocent approach is characterized by: (1) an emphasis
that stranger rape is the only ―real‖ rape; (2) a belief that nonstranger sexual assault is not
as serious as stranger rape and is often the victim‘s fault; (3) statements that any victim
inconsistency ruins her credibility; (4) an emphasis on the ubiquity of false reporting and
victims‘ lack of cooperation; (5) responses to interview questions based on the
―righteousness‖ of the victim; (6) reluctance to unwillingness to arrest in ―he said/she
said‖ cases

Source

You're not going to find a study looking at the entirety of human society, but there are many studies that look at particular jurisdictions which conclude that people often try to find reasons to blame victims for sexual assault.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
June 16 2015 22:19 GMT
#40743
The Obama administration is ordering food companies to phase out the use of artery-clogging trans fats over the next three years, calling them a threat to public health.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced on Tuesday that it had finalized its determination that partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), the main source of artificial trans fat in processed foods, are not “generally recognized as safe” for use in human food. Food manufacturers will have three years to remove PHOs from products, the FDA said.

“The FDA’s action on this major source of artificial trans fat demonstrates the agency’s commitment to the heart health of all Americans," said the FDA's Acting Commissioner Stephen Ostroff. “This action is expected to reduce coronary heart disease and prevent thousands of fatal heart attacks every year.”

Scientists say there are no health benefits to the fats, which are used in processing food and in restaurants, usually to improve texture, shelf life or flavor. They can raise levels of “bad” cholesterol and lower “good” cholesterol, increasing the risk of heart disease, the leading cause of death in the United States. The fats are created when hydrogen is added to vegetable oil to make it more solid, which is why they are often called partially hydrogenated oils.

Because companies have already eliminated trans fats from many processed foods, consumers are unlikely to notice a difference from the FDA ruling. Once a staple of the American diet, food companies have started using other kinds of oils to replace them. The FDA says that between 2003 and 2012, consumer trans fat consumption decreased by an estimated 78 percent. The FDA action will remove artificial trans fats from the food supply almost entirely.

But some foods still have them, and the FDA says those trans fats remaining in the food supply are a threat to public health. Some of the foods that commonly contain trans fats are pie crusts, biscuits, microwave popcorn, coffee creamers, frozen pizza, refrigerated dough, vegetable shortenings and stick margarines.

To phase the fats out, the FDA made a preliminary determination in 2013 that trans fats no longer fall in the agency's “generally recognized as safe” category, which covers thousands of additives that manufacturers can add to foods without FDA review. The agency made that decision final Tuesday.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
June 16 2015 23:41 GMT
#40744
On June 17 2015 07:05 Mercy13 wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 06:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.


People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.

Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.


I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.


Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.

If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.


I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".


Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.


I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.

I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.

I am not just talking about college campuses.

I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.

This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).

What happened in 1993 is a red herring. We're talking about the last decade or so. If a woman had a hard time getting justice while married in 1993, that's a shame, but it doesn't mean that women have a hard time getting justice while unmarried and on campus.

I'll also point out that many consider a woman having non-consentual sex with a man to not be rape (no penetration of the man) and that the man in the video could have been the one who was actually sexually assaulted.

As for society being dismissive of rape allegations I'd have to see figures on that. But bear in mind that false rape accusations do exist, and that society should be skeptical when it comes to any accusation.

Real victim blaming shouldn't happen, but what is classified as victim blaming has gone too far. 'Don't walk alone in dark alley' sounds like good advice for both men and women!

What I've written off is the need for a new social crusade. Rape and sexual assault have been on the decline. Moreover, the new social crusade has relied heavily on false statistics and has pushed for the new campus rules that you agree have gone too far. I really don't think it was necessary and I think the facts bear out my opinion.


Here you go!

Show nested quote +
Findings from the interviews revealed that detectives had two approaches to rape victims:
―innocent until proven guilty‖ and ―guilty until proven innocent.‖ The innocent until
proven guilty approach is characterized by: (1) a passion for working sex crimes; (2)
engaging the victim as an ally in the investigation; (3) expecting victim inconsistencies
based partially on extant law enforcement protocols and trauma-related factors; (4)
assertions that false reports are rare; (5) knowledge of the dynamics related to delayed
reporting; (5) a belief that cases involving alcohol, drugs, or prior/initially consensual sex
are serious cases and occur with more frequency than stranger rape; and (6) frustration
that departmental leadership does not take sexual assault as seriously as homicide (this
was emphasized more by LAPD detectives).
In contrast, the guilty until proven innocent approach is characterized by: (1) an emphasis
that stranger rape is the only ―real‖ rape; (2) a belief that nonstranger sexual assault is not
as serious as stranger rape and is often the victim‘s fault; (3) statements that any victim
inconsistency ruins her credibility; (4) an emphasis on the ubiquity of false reporting and
victims‘ lack of cooperation; (5) responses to interview questions based on the
―righteousness‖ of the victim; (6) reluctance to unwillingness to arrest in ―he said/she
said‖ cases

Source

You're not going to find a study looking at the entirety of human society, but there are many studies that look at particular jurisdictions which conclude that people often try to find reasons to blame victims for sexual assault.

Thanks, but this is a very long report and I'm not sure what I'm supposed to make of your small quote. From reading a bit, the differences between 'guilty until proven innocent' vs 'innocent until proven guilty' approaches are fairly subjective and one doesn't seem to be 'bad' in the author's eyes. Both are interviewing victims and suspects, checking evidence and credibility, and reporting to DA's. The 'guilty until proven innocent' group is generally more skeptical, and less likely to make an arrest, but the interview quotes are hardly atrocious.
Another stated: ―I feel bad for the victims. I call it buyer‘s remorse‘ where girls who have been partying and drinking have sex with a man
willingly. Is it a rape? In my opinion, no.70 But we take a report. There needs to be some
responsibility toward the victim as well. You are responsible for how much you drink and where
you spend your time.

I can absolutely see how this attitude could lead to problems when in sexual assault cases, but this doesn't seem to be inappropriate behavior either. Investigations do need to include tough questions and skepticism is generally healthy for a police detective. Wanting to strike a better balance is great, but from what I've read this doesn't seem damning.

But again it's a big document (535 pages) so if you think I'm wrong about something in it let me know.
Danglars
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States12133 Posts
June 17 2015 01:16 GMT
#40745
On June 17 2015 06:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.


People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.

Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.


I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.


Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.

If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.


I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".


Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.


I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.

I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.

I am not just talking about college campuses.

I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.

This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).

What happened in 1993 is a red herring. We're talking about the last decade or so. If a woman had a hard time getting justice while married in 1993, that's a shame, but it doesn't mean that women have a hard time getting justice while unmarried and on campus.

I'll also point out that many consider a woman having non-consentual sex with a man to not be rape (no penetration of the man) and that the man in the video could have been the one who was actually sexually assaulted.

As for society being dismissive of rape allegations I'd have to see figures on that. But bear in mind that false rape accusations do exist, and that society should be skeptical when it comes to any accusation.

Real victim blaming shouldn't happen, but what is classified as victim blaming has gone too far. 'Don't walk alone in dark alley' sounds like good advice for both men and women!

What I've written off is the need for a new social crusade. Rape and sexual assault have been on the decline. Moreover, the new social crusade has relied heavily on false statistics and has pushed for the new campus rules that you agree have gone too far. I really don't think it was necessary and I think the facts bear out my opinion.

What is classified as victim blaming has gone too far, right.

On June 17 2015 07:02 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 06:22 Stratos_speAr wrote:
On June 17 2015 06:16 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:47 Stratos_speAr wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:46 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 05:32 Stratos_speAr wrote:

You're projecting. You're the one sticking to an obnoxious narrative and straw manning. I did see that you think that colleges have gone too far. I didn't disagree with you on that and hence I didn't address it.


I'm not projecting at all, and this is yet another example of your BS. You completely side-step or ignore the things you either explicitly or implicitly say and then try to sound intelligent by going "Gotcha! I never said that!"

This thing started out because you explicitly did a whole-sale write-off of the issue of justice for sexual assault (which was what I was responding to with my "stick your head in the sand" post, not to the side argument about questionable reporting). Not only did you say it was a "phantom norm" that people are reacting to (directly implying that it isn't a problem at all, akin to saying "racism doesn't exist"), but you also consistently trivialize it by comparing it to any other crime not getting justice when sexual assault is by far the most under-reported crime in our society precisely because their is a lack of faith in the system.

I said that not all rapes get justice, which is not writing off the issue.

The whole 'rape culture' and 'rape epidemic' narratives are entirely manufactured. There is no statistical proof of a rape epidemic and you'd have difficulty finding a more female friendly culture than what we have today. If there is a lack of faith in the system it is because people like you try to discredit it. So why don't you get your head out of the sand and stop hurting sexual assault victims all over again.


Well, since I just edited my post to demonstrate an explicit quote showing you writing off the issue, you might want to check yourself.

Also, just because our culture is more female friendly than others doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality.

And I never said "rape epidemic" anywhere here, but you've mentioned in multiple times and tried to attribute it to me. Another blatant attempt by you to falsely portray my view points so you can argue against them.

You gonna ever answer for that, or just shift the goal posts and ignore it so you don't have to own up to your intellectual dishonesty?

I tried to attribute the 'rape epidemic' narrative to you because when I cited it, you seemed to defend it. I said that the norm people were outraged over was phantom, and you quickly called me a liar. I cited the 'rape epidemic' narrative and you told me my head was in the sand.

I'm not sure what 'true equality' is supposed to be. If you mean equality of opportunity I'm on board and think we can do more for both men and women, but I disagree with the feminist notion that we need some sort of parity of outcomes. And I point to female friendly because there is now plenty of systemic bias against men. It is not as if we live in a society where only men have advantages.


I can agree with most of this, to an extent. I agree that we should strive for equality of opportunity and that there are distinct disadvantages that men have in society.

My problem with your comments is that you quickly jumped to a conclusion about what I believed and then argued against that stock character. I never defended the "epidemic" idea. I was attacking your comments that insinuated that there was never a real problem with sexual assault in our society, which is why I mentioned your "head being in the sand".

Most everyone agrees with equality of opportunity. The difference is where you think that some people are arguing for equality of outcome, when they think differently. I haven't talked to very many feminists (or liberals in general) that want equality of outcome. The difference seems to be that you (and most conservatives) have different ideas about how to achieve equality of opportunity when compared to how your average liberal thinks we can achieve that.

I also think that you're exaggerating how often men have a disadvantage compared to women. Yes, there are certainly issues where men are at a disadvantage, and it really grinds my gears when feminists just dismiss them (e.g. men having to sign up for the draft but not women, women having a massive advantage in child custody battles just by virtue of being the mother, men being far more likely to be sentenced to prison time, men being pigeon-holed into "masculine" roles, etc.), but it's not like society has suddenly swung to the point where women have just as many areas in life where they get an advantage over men. The world has been male-dominated in pretty much every society for pretty much all of human history. It's not like we magically turned that around in the last 30 years. There's still work to do.

I don't think I said that there was never, in the entire course of human history, a real problem with sexual assault. My comments were that there wasn't a need when the latest social movement kicked in. Again, I think the statistics bear that out.

I think there is absolutely a demand for equality of outcomes. If you look at the 'more women in STEM' push, the rhetoric may very well be that equal opportunity is demanded and that 'discrimination' is cited as a barrier. But the reality is that they are asking for more equality in outcomes, since outcomes is the primary factual basis for the entire push. Women have special access to grants and are often given hiring preferences to get them into those fields and yet since a difference in outcomes remains, the push continues. Moreover, and I think tellingly, in science fields where women are the majority there doesn't seem to be a concern.

To your list of female advantages I'll add female over-representation in college, a bias towards higher grades for girls over boys in school, women control the majority of household spending, men are more likely to be homeless (and particularly die while homeless), less likely to receive domestic abuse support and that men are far more likely than women to die on the job. However I do not think that there's any good way to determine in all this which sex has a total advantage over the other (edit: as some men's rights groups might claim). Maybe women are more disadvantaged, but determining that seems far too messy and subjective for my taste.

As long as people are pushing for equality of opportunity I'm happy, but I from my perspective feminists are pushing for inequality of opportunity and equality in outcomes where women aren't already advantaged. It all seems very, very biased.

I think that's the cusp of a very important topic on what left-leaning political talkers mean when they say, as Stratos_speAr puts it, [x] doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality. Would they know it if they saw it? What about all the points in quoted RE: fields in science that are women-advantaged, college enrollment, etc?

On June 17 2015 08:41 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 07:05 Mercy13 wrote:
On June 17 2015 06:34 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On June 17 2015 06:09 Stratos_speAr wrote:
You'd have to explain what you think is a mis-characterization.


People who don't take me seriously are often people who don't like having their opinions challenged with facts.

Incidents like Duke Lacross and UVA didn't take the media by storm because the public is dismissive of rape allegations. Quite the opposite actually. Society was quick to believe.


I've mentioned several times that I completely agree that we have a problem on college campuses with how rape allegations are handled. This statement does nothing in our dialog other than try to attribute the idea that I think that all campuses are dismissive of rape allegations, something that I never said. The only thing I ever mentioned were two anecdotal incidents to demonstrate that there is still a problem for some women and that their problem isn't completely de-legitimized just because some colleges have gone overboard with reacting.


Yes it is. That's what the objective facts will tell you. Rape, including campus rape, has been on the decline (not an 'epidemic') and I have never lived in a world where rape wasn't taken seriously and been considered one of the more heinous crimes. Like all crimes, justice is not always served, but that does not excuse a manufactured witch-hunt.

If you and others like you continue to seek injustice and inequality on this matter, you'll continue to get disagreement from me.


I never said rape incidences were increasing and I never even used the term "rape epidemic".


Yeah that whole 'innocent until proven guilty' was really... 'problematic.' All hail the new standard of 'listen and believe'.


I never mentioned anything about "innocent until proven guilty" being problematic and "listen and believe" ("guilty until proven innocent") being a good thing. This is an incredibly obvious attempt to trivialize my comments by creating a hugely exaggerated caricature of my statement.

I was alluding to the fact that rape has been the most accepted and under-reported crime for most of human history and that, for instance, marital rape wasn't universally criminalized in this country until 1993. There is a distinct and very prevalent/documented culture of skepticism or lack of action in the general population when it concerns sexual assault accusations.

I am not just talking about college campuses.

I'm talking about sexual assault as it pertains to our whole society. We have countless examples of this; schools or communities letting young athletes off the hook for this (Florida State investigation? That town in Ohio(?)?), comments about how "women shouldn't dress like sluts or walk alone in dark allies" (victim blaming that is irrelevant to where the majority of rapes actually take place), or that police are frequently overly-skeptical of rape claims and label them as "false allegations" in documents in direct violation of their protocol.

This entire argument started because I mentioned that the whole problem with college campuses handling accusations is an over-reaction to the problem of sexual assault in our society as a whole, and then you completely wrote that whole issue off, implying that there was never a need for a societal push to increase our awareness, understanding, and prosecution of rape (I have explicitly quoted you on this at least twice, so don't deny it).

What happened in 1993 is a red herring. We're talking about the last decade or so. If a woman had a hard time getting justice while married in 1993, that's a shame, but it doesn't mean that women have a hard time getting justice while unmarried and on campus.

I'll also point out that many consider a woman having non-consentual sex with a man to not be rape (no penetration of the man) and that the man in the video could have been the one who was actually sexually assaulted.

As for society being dismissive of rape allegations I'd have to see figures on that. But bear in mind that false rape accusations do exist, and that society should be skeptical when it comes to any accusation.

Real victim blaming shouldn't happen, but what is classified as victim blaming has gone too far. 'Don't walk alone in dark alley' sounds like good advice for both men and women!

What I've written off is the need for a new social crusade. Rape and sexual assault have been on the decline. Moreover, the new social crusade has relied heavily on false statistics and has pushed for the new campus rules that you agree have gone too far. I really don't think it was necessary and I think the facts bear out my opinion.


Here you go!

Findings from the interviews revealed that detectives had two approaches to rape victims:
―innocent until proven guilty‖ and ―guilty until proven innocent.‖ The innocent until
proven guilty approach is characterized by: (1) a passion for working sex crimes; (2)
engaging the victim as an ally in the investigation; (3) expecting victim inconsistencies
based partially on extant law enforcement protocols and trauma-related factors; (4)
assertions that false reports are rare; (5) knowledge of the dynamics related to delayed
reporting; (5) a belief that cases involving alcohol, drugs, or prior/initially consensual sex
are serious cases and occur with more frequency than stranger rape; and (6) frustration
that departmental leadership does not take sexual assault as seriously as homicide (this
was emphasized more by LAPD detectives).
In contrast, the guilty until proven innocent approach is characterized by: (1) an emphasis
that stranger rape is the only ―real‖ rape; (2) a belief that nonstranger sexual assault is not
as serious as stranger rape and is often the victim‘s fault; (3) statements that any victim
inconsistency ruins her credibility; (4) an emphasis on the ubiquity of false reporting and
victims‘ lack of cooperation; (5) responses to interview questions based on the
―righteousness‖ of the victim; (6) reluctance to unwillingness to arrest in ―he said/she
said‖ cases

Source

You're not going to find a study looking at the entirety of human society, but there are many studies that look at particular jurisdictions which conclude that people often try to find reasons to blame victims for sexual assault.

Thanks, but this is a very long report and I'm not sure what I'm supposed to make of your small quote. From reading a bit, the differences between 'guilty until proven innocent' vs 'innocent until proven guilty' approaches are fairly subjective and one doesn't seem to be 'bad' in the author's eyes. Both are interviewing victims and suspects, checking evidence and credibility, and reporting to DA's. The 'guilty until proven innocent' group is generally more skeptical, and less likely to make an arrest, but the interview quotes are hardly atrocious.
Show nested quote +
Another stated: ―I feel bad for the victims. I call it buyer‘s remorse‘ where girls who have been partying and drinking have sex with a man
willingly. Is it a rape? In my opinion, no.70 But we take a report. There needs to be some
responsibility toward the victim as well. You are responsible for how much you drink and where
you spend your time.

I can absolutely see how this attitude could lead to problems when in sexual assault cases, but this doesn't seem to be inappropriate behavior either. Investigations do need to include tough questions and skepticism is generally healthy for a police detective. Wanting to strike a better balance is great, but from what I've read this doesn't seem damning.

But again it's a big document (535 pages) so if you think I'm wrong about something in it let me know.

I think we're approaching very dangerous conclusions about sex amongst unmarrieds on college campuses when both parties are inebriated. The line of investigation stops at "she cannot give her consent," and pity the fool that suggests excessive drinking at parties is a bad idea to start. Anybody sympathize with the policemen that takes police reports of accusations of rape when both parties have been drinking at a party late at night? Assuming for the moment the video with the woman being the initiator of drunken sex is true (or cases like that exist), you want her expelled & pariahed on cause of equality?
Great armies come from happy zealots, and happy zealots come from California!
TL+ Member
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23173 Posts
June 17 2015 03:01 GMT
#40746
Sen. Bernie Sanders is beginning to show some life against Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire with the Democratic presidential primary there less than eight months away, according to a Suffolk University poll of likely Granite State Democratic primary voters.

Clinton, the former secretary of state, was the choice of 41 percent, followed by Vermonter Sanders (31 percent), Vice President Joe Biden (7 percent), former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (3 percent), and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee and former Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia tied at 1 percent. Fifteen percent of likely Democrats were undecided.

“Most political observers felt that Hillary Clinton’s large early lead among Democratic voters would eventually shrunk a bit over time,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “But in New Hampshire right now, the lead has shrunk a lot, and this is a much different Democratic primary race than we are seeing in other states so far.”

The poll depicts a clear gender gap, with Clinton carrying women 47 percent to 28 percent but trailing Sanders among men 35 percent to 32 percent. Geographically, Clinton easily carried the central and highly populated southern counties of Rockingham and Hillsborough, but Sanders led 47 percent to 26 percent in the five counties in northern and western New Hampshire, including Cheshire, Coos, Grafton, and Sullivan counties—which border his home state—and Carroll County.

Although Clinton enjoys a 10-point lead statewide, she leads Sanders 38 percent to 35 percent among those who “know both” of the candidates.


Source

Bernie's on the move.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44221 Posts
June 17 2015 03:14 GMT
#40747
On June 17 2015 12:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
Sen. Bernie Sanders is beginning to show some life against Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire with the Democratic presidential primary there less than eight months away, according to a Suffolk University poll of likely Granite State Democratic primary voters.

Clinton, the former secretary of state, was the choice of 41 percent, followed by Vermonter Sanders (31 percent), Vice President Joe Biden (7 percent), former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (3 percent), and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee and former Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia tied at 1 percent. Fifteen percent of likely Democrats were undecided.

“Most political observers felt that Hillary Clinton’s large early lead among Democratic voters would eventually shrunk a bit over time,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “But in New Hampshire right now, the lead has shrunk a lot, and this is a much different Democratic primary race than we are seeing in other states so far.”

The poll depicts a clear gender gap, with Clinton carrying women 47 percent to 28 percent but trailing Sanders among men 35 percent to 32 percent. Geographically, Clinton easily carried the central and highly populated southern counties of Rockingham and Hillsborough, but Sanders led 47 percent to 26 percent in the five counties in northern and western New Hampshire, including Cheshire, Coos, Grafton, and Sullivan counties—which border his home state—and Carroll County.

Although Clinton enjoys a 10-point lead statewide, she leads Sanders 38 percent to 35 percent among those who “know both” of the candidates.


Source

Bernie's on the move.


Awesome! He's still got a looong way to go though.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
screamingpalm
Profile Joined October 2011
United States1527 Posts
June 17 2015 03:32 GMT
#40748
On June 17 2015 10:16 Danglars wrote:

I think that's the cusp of a very important topic on what left-leaning political talkers mean when they say, as Stratos_speAr puts it, [x] doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality. Would they know it if they saw it? What about all the points in quoted RE: fields in science that are women-advantaged, college enrollment, etc?


Hey man, I might be left leaning on most things, but I have to agree with you two on this one. Admittedly the feminism serves us well anecdotally. I stay home and the wife works- at first because of my health issues, and now we see that she has much better opportunities (at least from an unskilled entry level PoV).

Why should I break my back doing hard labor when she can earn twice as much in a cushy office sitting at a cubicle- and get treated like an actual human being with benefits starting from day one? XD
MMT University is coming! http://www.mmtuniversity.org/
killa_robot
Profile Joined May 2010
Canada1884 Posts
June 17 2015 04:11 GMT
#40749
On June 17 2015 12:32 screamingpalm wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 10:16 Danglars wrote:

I think that's the cusp of a very important topic on what left-leaning political talkers mean when they say, as Stratos_speAr puts it, [x] doesn't mean that we've achieved true equality. Would they know it if they saw it? What about all the points in quoted RE: fields in science that are women-advantaged, college enrollment, etc?


Hey man, I might be left leaning on most things, but I have to agree with you two on this one. Admittedly the feminism serves us well anecdotally. I stay home and the wife works- at first because of my health issues, and now we see that she has much better opportunities (at least from an unskilled entry level PoV).

Why should I break my back doing hard labor when she can earn twice as much in a cushy office sitting at a cubicle- and get treated like an actual human being with benefits starting from day one? XD


As the efforts to promote women in the workplace increase, the natural next step is to abolish the "wage gap" by having a mandatory higher pay for female employees.

Eventually, men will realize their time is better suited to hanging around the house, doing chores, and taking care of the children if need be.

With the workforce back to being dominated by one gender, the cost of living will adjust accordingly. Men will never have to work again, because two people will be able to live off of a woman's wage.

Go feminism!
IgnE
Profile Joined November 2010
United States7681 Posts
June 17 2015 05:05 GMT
#40750
Maybe we will start to see the demonization and subsequent subjugation of men as employers realize that women are more suited to waged labor and men are shunted off into a newly created state-sponsored indigency. Intractable, depressed, and sometimes violent men will be replaced by more compliant women who are more willing to buy in to a fading capitalist dream. Hanna Rosin might be right for all the wrong reasons.
The unrealistic sound of these propositions is indicative, not of their utopian character, but of the strength of the forces which prevent their realization.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
June 17 2015 13:46 GMT
#40751
DERRY, N.H. — Jeb Bush said Tuesday that the enhanced interrogation techniques deployed by his brother after Sept. 11 attacks were no longer appropriate, that he hoped the Supreme Court would rule against same-sex marriage, and mocked Hillary Rodham Clinton for passing few laws during her eight years in the Senate.

In an extensive interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News in New Hampshire, Mr. Bush was by turns serious and playful, at one point audibly chuckling at criticism from Donald Trump, who is now running for president.

“Sorry,” Mr. Bush said of his laughter. But he did not seem sorry.

The Fox interview will be broadcast on Tuesday night, but it could be overheard by reporters standing nearby.

Pressed on the same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court, Mr. Bush said: “I believe in traditional marriage. I hope the Supreme Court rules that way.”

He added that the country should not discriminate against any American based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Bush, a two-term governor of Florida, was in New Hampshire for a town hall-style meeting a day after officially announcing his presidential candidacy in Miami. He repeatedly rebuked Mrs. Clinton, his biggest Democratic rival, in Tuesday’s interview. He called her record in Libya, where terrorists killed the American ambassador, “a complete failure.”

Recounting her legislative accomplishments, Mr. Bush said of his work in Florida, “I put that record up against Hillary Clinton’s any day of the week.”

But he offered words of praise, as well, calling Mrs. Clinton “smart” and “tough.”


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Sermokala
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
United States13892 Posts
June 17 2015 13:58 GMT
#40752
On June 17 2015 22:46 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
DERRY, N.H. — Jeb Bush said Tuesday that the enhanced interrogation techniques deployed by his brother after Sept. 11 attacks were no longer appropriate, that he hoped the Supreme Court would rule against same-sex marriage, and mocked Hillary Rodham Clinton for passing few laws during her eight years in the Senate.

In an extensive interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News in New Hampshire, Mr. Bush was by turns serious and playful, at one point audibly chuckling at criticism from Donald Trump, who is now running for president.

“Sorry,” Mr. Bush said of his laughter. But he did not seem sorry.

The Fox interview will be broadcast on Tuesday night, but it could be overheard by reporters standing nearby.

Pressed on the same-sex marriage case before the Supreme Court, Mr. Bush said: “I believe in traditional marriage. I hope the Supreme Court rules that way.”

He added that the country should not discriminate against any American based on sexual orientation.

Mr. Bush, a two-term governor of Florida, was in New Hampshire for a town hall-style meeting a day after officially announcing his presidential candidacy in Miami. He repeatedly rebuked Mrs. Clinton, his biggest Democratic rival, in Tuesday’s interview. He called her record in Libya, where terrorists killed the American ambassador, “a complete failure.”

Recounting her legislative accomplishments, Mr. Bush said of his work in Florida, “I put that record up against Hillary Clinton’s any day of the week.”

But he offered words of praise, as well, calling Mrs. Clinton “smart” and “tough.”


Source

I love how incredibly calculated this is. Hes against gay marriage but hes covering his left flank by saying that people shouldn't be discriminated against because of their orientation. Mocking hillary but at the same time strengthening her for the primary challenge.

And really the only way to respond to tump is to laugh at that clown. He disgusts even me.
A wise man will say that he knows nothing. We're gona party like its 2752 Hail Dark Brandon
QuanticHawk
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
United States32050 Posts
June 17 2015 14:15 GMT
#40753
On June 17 2015 12:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 17 2015 12:01 GreenHorizons wrote:
Sen. Bernie Sanders is beginning to show some life against Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire with the Democratic presidential primary there less than eight months away, according to a Suffolk University poll of likely Granite State Democratic primary voters.

Clinton, the former secretary of state, was the choice of 41 percent, followed by Vermonter Sanders (31 percent), Vice President Joe Biden (7 percent), former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (3 percent), and former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee and former Sen. Jim Webb of Virginia tied at 1 percent. Fifteen percent of likely Democrats were undecided.

“Most political observers felt that Hillary Clinton’s large early lead among Democratic voters would eventually shrunk a bit over time,” said David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston. “But in New Hampshire right now, the lead has shrunk a lot, and this is a much different Democratic primary race than we are seeing in other states so far.”

The poll depicts a clear gender gap, with Clinton carrying women 47 percent to 28 percent but trailing Sanders among men 35 percent to 32 percent. Geographically, Clinton easily carried the central and highly populated southern counties of Rockingham and Hillsborough, but Sanders led 47 percent to 26 percent in the five counties in northern and western New Hampshire, including Cheshire, Coos, Grafton, and Sullivan counties—which border his home state—and Carroll County.

Although Clinton enjoys a 10-point lead statewide, she leads Sanders 38 percent to 35 percent among those who “know both” of the candidates.


Source

Bernie's on the move.


Awesome! He's still got a looong way to go though.


how the fuck is Biden getting curb stomped so hard by that stupid ass closeted republican Clinton. My god I'm going to cry when it comes election time
PROFESSIONAL GAMER - SEND ME OFFERS TO JOIN YOUR TEAM - USA USA USA
ticklishmusic
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States15977 Posts
June 17 2015 14:18 GMT
#40754
Dunno, because maybe HE'S NOT ACTUALLY RUNNING
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
QuanticHawk
Profile Blog Joined May 2007
United States32050 Posts
June 17 2015 14:46 GMT
#40755
owned before my mornin coffee SWEET

PROFESSIONAL GAMER - SEND ME OFFERS TO JOIN YOUR TEAM - USA USA USA
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23173 Posts
June 17 2015 16:48 GMT
#40756
Gawker: Why did you decide to speak at the fast food wage hearing today?

Nick Hanauer: I flew out to do testimony obviously because they asked me to, but [also] because I was at the forefront of the effort to pass $15 minimum wage in Seattle, and have been collaborating with the people who are trying to make that happen across the country.

Gawker: And your message is: it worked in Seattle, and it can work here?

NH: Yeah. My message is that the counterclaim—which is that if wages go up, employment will go down—is a scam. It’s a con job. It’s an intimidation tactic. There is absolutely no evidence anywhere that it’s true. On the contrary, where you find high wages you usually find low unemployment.

Gawker: It’s a bit of a chicken and egg situation though, isn’t it? Which came first, the high wages, or the strong economy in the place that has the high wages? The typical rejoinder is, “higher wages drive down employment.”

NH: Show me an example. Show me an example of where high wages drove down employment. You show me a high wage place, I’ll show you a low unemployment place. And this is because the fundamental law of capitalism is: when workers have more money, businesses have more customers, and need more workers. The idea that high wages equals low employment, it’s absurd. And you have to understand that when somebody like me tells somebody like you that [high wages equals low employment] is the case, the only thing that’s true about that statement is that if I can get you to believe it, it would be very good for me. Which is why people like me have been saying it, again and again and again, and why people like me have said it at every point at which workers’ rights have been advanced. You can go back 150 years and literally find the same people saying the same thing in the same way. “If we have to pay you more, it will be bad for you.” And that’s because saying that is a much more polite way of saying, “I’m rich, you’re poor, and I would prefer to keep it what way.”


Source

"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Cowboy64
Profile Joined April 2015
115 Posts
June 17 2015 18:33 GMT
#40757
I don't think it's fair to say that high-wages drive down employment, but it's equally unfair to say high-wages result in low unemployment.

Places with low unemployment will usually have higher-wages because the demand for labor is higher and the supply lower. I've heard some good arguments for and against raising the minimum wage, but this is not one of them.
screamingpalm
Profile Joined October 2011
United States1527 Posts
June 17 2015 18:45 GMT
#40758
I still think Warren Buffet's solution of expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit is the more sensible one. Problems of inflation and other issues are well illustrated in the comments of that article. Usual bad solution to real problems from the left.
MMT University is coming! http://www.mmtuniversity.org/
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21647 Posts
June 17 2015 18:49 GMT
#40759
On June 18 2015 03:45 screamingpalm wrote:
I still think Warren Buffet's solution of expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit is the more sensible one. Problems of inflation and other issues are well illustrated in the comments of that article. Usual bad solution to real problems from the left.

beats the no solutions from the right?
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
screamingpalm
Profile Joined October 2011
United States1527 Posts
June 17 2015 19:07 GMT
#40760
On June 18 2015 03:49 Gorsameth wrote:
beats the no solutions from the right?


Just have to grow new fingers to plug the new holes in the dyke lol.
MMT University is coming! http://www.mmtuniversity.org/
Prev 1 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
SEL Masters #4 - Day 1
CranKy Ducklings58
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft123
ProTech63
Livibee 61
Nina 32
StarCraft: Brood War
Artosis 800
NaDa 92
sSak 33
Terrorterran 11
Dota 2
monkeys_forever364
NeuroSwarm77
League of Legends
JimRising 586
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1634
fl0m1209
taco 1124
sgares90
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox434
Liquid`Ken60
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor92
Other Games
summit1g9577
C9.Mang0272
Maynarde165
ViBE159
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick44810
BasetradeTV157
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• RyuSc2 66
• Berry_CruncH43
• Hupsaiya 32
• sooper7s
• Migwel
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• IndyKCrew
• Kozan
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Jankos2174
• masondota21748
Other Games
• Scarra1834
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
9h 22m
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs Reynor
OSC
12h 22m
Replay Cast
23h 22m
RSL Revival
1d 9h
Classic vs Cure
FEL
1d 15h
OSC
1d 19h
RSL Revival
2 days
FEL
2 days
FEL
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
[ Show More ]
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs QiaoGege
Dewalt vs Fengzi
Hawk vs Zhanhun
Sziky vs Mihu
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Zhanhun vs Sziky
Fengzi vs Hawk
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
RSL Revival
3 days
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Dewalt
QiaoGege vs Dewalt
Hawk vs Bonyth
Sziky vs Fengzi
Mihu vs Zhanhun
QiaoGege vs Zhanhun
Fengzi vs Mihu
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Proleague 2025-07-07
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSL Xiamen Invitational
CSL Xiamen Invitational: ShowMatche
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Underdog Cup #2
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.