Jump to content

General US Politics


Ansem

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 14.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

7 hours ago, SullyMcGully said:

I don't intend to protect Moore, but if a relationship between a sixteen-year old and a thirty-something is pedophilic, then... I know a few pedophiles. Homeschoolers can be weird that way.

that's gross.

2 hours ago, Res said:

This LA Times op-ed agrees it's a cultural norm... personally as someone in their mid-30s the idea of pursuing a relationship with anyone in their teens is objectionable regardless of the legality - the differences in life experiences are just too vast. 

 

 

that and 16 yo absolutely look like children. even if they don't look like children, they act like children (so maturity, as you said).

pursuing 16 yo is just gross for adults. doesn't matter the circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reasoning I can see for an adult to pursue someone underage... is because they prefer their partners to be inexperienced and childlike, as opposed to dating someone who is their equal maturity-wise. Which is creepy as fuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, some homeschoolers (not all of them, just a few of us that are really weird) empathize "19th-century parenting techniques" where children are expected to be adults by the time they are sixteen. I know a 19-year-old girl who just married a 39-year old guy because the guy was fairly successful, had a good reputation, and was ready to start a family. That just happened to be what the girl was looking for in a man, and since he could provide a good life for her, her parents were all in favor. Homeschoolers can be extremely mature for their age. Or the opposite can be true.  It goes both ways really. 

This is all off-topic, but I just wanted to clarify that while Roy Moore may be a pervert or whatnot, that's not necessarily the case for everybody who falls for a teenager. I mean, I like a lot of significantly older women, so...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some things should stay in the 19th century. I'm willing to bet there was a reason why he pursued a 19 year old instead of a 29 year old to 'start a family'.

I don't think homeschooling makes you unusually more adult-like than any other state of being raised. Your brain certainly hasn't matured by the time your sixteen - no matter how much ma and pa are pushing you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SullyMcGully I mean, I have two aunts that married when they were 16. One of them are highly immature now despite being 60; one of them I don't even know the case. Often times, the guy probably had a job and stable income, and the girl probably didn't have much going for her but her looks according to what they thought at the time. In fact, her husband was in his 30s and desperate to get married.

What I'm trying to say is that the situation you're describing reminds me of arranged marriages in the third world, which is much different to what Roy Moore was doing. It doesn't sound like "19th century values," so much as too little faith in her to choose her way in life, which is far from expecting someone to be an adult. Maybe I am presuming too much or maybe you haven't seen it this way, I don't know you, but luckily in the 21st century we realized that children were always fucking idiots and treat them as idiots until they're in their early 20s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's crazy what the Republican Party has become. A few years ago, the Tea Party were considered the lunatic faction of the GOP, now they're almost moderates. And the remaining sane people (McCain, Kasich, Collins) are now "RINOs"...

Here in Quebec, the Democrats would be considered centre-right wing. Republicans see them as far-left...

That's a weird country you have...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SullyMcGully Maturity is one thing, but it's really a matter of life experience. Teenagers, often moreso if they were homeschooled, lack life experience. Conversely, a guy in his 30's will certainly have a good amount (a person's mid-20's tend to include a major shift in their identity due to their experiences). Teenagers don't know what they want, they haven't seen enough to make major decisions with confidence. An older person is basically preying upon that inexperience as an easy target, which is a gross misuse of power.

I'm speaking from the position of a 30 year old college professor who teaches mostly freshmen (thus, 18-19 year olds). It would be easy for me to seduce my students because of my position, experience, and confidence, but it'd be extremely immoral and I doubt it would be emotionally fulfilling.

Edited by Johann
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I’ll generally adopt a live-and-let-live attitude with respect to relationships of extreme age difference. If 2 people have a mutually-beneficial thing going on, whereby one accrues the benefit of economic security from an older, more career-established provider. And the other accrues the benefit of marital relations with a younger, more sexually desirable partner…

…w/e…

I wouldn’t.  I’m not one to judge if that’s your thing. That works for some people.

Lets not gloss over the fact that this isn’t what Judge Moore is accused of doing.  He’s accused of having an inappropriate sexual relationship with a 14 year old girl, while her mother was in proceedings before his court.

…which if true, is not just sexually predatory behavior. It’s an abuse of public office, a violation of The Rules of Professional Conduct governing attorneys and officers of the court, and behavior that if it had come to light during the course of his judgeship would have been grounds for his immediate removal from the bench + disbarment from the practice of law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Johann said:

@SullyMcGully Maturity is one thing, but it's really a matter of life experience. Teenagers, often moreso if they were homeschooled, lack life experience. Conversely, a guy in his 30's will certainly have a good amount (a person's mid-20's tend to include a major shift in their identity due to their experiences). Teenagers don't know what they want, they haven't seen enough to make major decisions with confidence. An older person is basically preying upon that inexperience as an easy target, which is a gross misuse of power.

All of this.

This isn't to undermine teenagers in any way; I know many who are remarkably responsible (I think that's a better term than mature) and decisive. I had a friend who was caring for her mother and running the household at 14. I was pretty responsible by around the same age. But we still lacked general life experience.

Also, it's not true that people married much younger in previous centuries. Even in the Middle Ages in Europe, marrying young was generally reserved for the aristocracy - it was quite common to be unmarried at 20, even when life expectancy was much shorter.

@Shoblongoo thank you for that information - definitely changes things!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SullyMcGully said:

I could argue with some of the above points, but if that's really a fight you want to have, you should start a new thread. 

Why say anything if you’re assuming I’m trying to pick a fight? Was anything I said particularly offensive? Because it sounds to me like what you’re describing is a reinforcement of gender norms more than age-based maturity.

A 30-year-old who attempts a relationship with a 14 or 16 year old has maturity issues himself or he’s a citizen in a socially backwards third world country like Pakistan (which was my country of reference if you were curious, because a lot of southern tradition and culture as you describe it reminds me of highly conservative Pakistani culture that I’ve thankfully only seen from the outside). I believe this comparison is a worthwhile one to make, because I’m offering my perspective on young marriage to older people and how even in the best case scenario to your anecdote it’s not comparable to Roy Moore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's somewhat of a call to the same rule authority may have over you in a relationship, or why most people see a problem with a teacher and student relationship, or a boss and worker, or a psychiatrist or doctor and patient from an ethical standpoint. It's possible for a 30 year old to manipulate a teenager into believing that's what they want.

There was a sixteen year old that came through with a sexual assault allegation as well, and he even left a message in her high school yearbook.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/roy-moore-signed-latest-accusers-high-school-yearbook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Archer of Red said:

And if anyone asks why Wikileaks is no longer credible, this is the most direct proof we have.

Ironic that “independent whistle blowers” were part of this conspiracy the whole time. Either way, that is playing into Putin’s hands; the whistleblower is selective and unreliable, so what information can we trust?

thank god for NYT, WaPo and to a lesser extent The Hill, The Atlantic, and 538.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

It is the third reason, though, WikiLeaks wrote, that “is the real kicker.” “If we publish them it will dramatically improve the perception of our impartiality,” WikiLeaks explained. “That means that the vast amount of stuff that we are publishing on Clinton will have much higher impact, because it won’t be perceived as coming from a ‘pro-Trump’ ‘pro-Russia’ source.” It then provided an email address and link where the Trump campaign could send the tax returns, and adds, “The same for any other negative stuff (documents, recordings) that you think has a decent chance of coming out. Let us put it out.”

Seems to be an acknowledgement from Wikileaks that they are in fact, a pro-Trump/pro-Russia source. Not that the "wikileaks is 100% objective no really you gais" will actually acknowledge this.

 

EDIT: It gets even better

Edited by The Gift of Jericho
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lord Raven said:

Why say anything if you’re assuming I’m trying to pick a fight? Was anything I said particularly offensive? Because it sounds to me like what you’re describing is a reinforcement of gender norms more than age-based maturity.

A 30-year-old who attempts a relationship with a 14 or 16 year old has maturity issues himself or he’s a citizen in a socially backwards third world country like Pakistan (which was my country of reference if you were curious, because a lot of southern tradition and culture as you describe it reminds me of highly conservative Pakistani culture that I’ve thankfully only seen from the outside). I believe this comparison is a worthwhile one to make, because I’m offering my perspective on young marriage to older people and how even in the best case scenario to your anecdote it’s not comparable to Roy Moore.

My apologies. "Fight" was a poor choice of words on my part. I meant "conversation", but I was sleepy and miswrote. I stand by the fact that there's nothing extremely political about the relationships between younger and older people. It's more of an ethical topic, and hence, off-topic within this particular thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shoblongoo said:

Lets not gloss over the fact that this isn’t what Judge Moore is accused of doing.  He’s accused of having an inappropriate sexual relationship with a 14 year old girl, while her mother was in proceedings before his court.

…which if true, is not just sexually predatory behavior. It’s an abuse of public office, a violation of The Rules of Professional Conduct governing attorneys and officers of the court, and behavior that if it had come to light during the course of his judgeship would have been grounds for his immediate removal from the bench + disbarment from the practice of law.

I'm quoting why it actually is political.

And also because it's not about the age gap, it's about the power imbalance, as everyone has been saying. A man who abuses his power in this fashion can't be trusted not to abuse it in other ways. It's very relevant to this thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Res said:

I'm quoting why it actually is political.

And also because it's not about the age gap, it's about the power imbalance, as everyone has been saying. A man who abuses his power in this fashion can't be trusted not to abuse it in other ways. It's very relevant to this thread.

 

Exactly. I wasn't trying to make a point about whether Roy Moore was OK or not, I think he's a pervert and he should probably drop out. I was just noting that not all romantic relationships between teenagers and adults are immoral or unwise. 

EDIT: If you want to know my actual opinion on the whole Roy Moore deal, this pretty much sums it up.

Edited by SullyMcGully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a note on that article: Clinton was impeached and Louis CK has been rightly dropped by FX and HBO, had his premier canceled and, thankfully, I've seen a lot of outlets reject his so-called 'apology'. So I'm not sure either of them has normalized anything.

That being said; sure, there's abuse of power everywhere (and yes, there are a few female celebrities in positions of power who've also been accused), from politics to entertainment to religion; has been for decades, and a lot of it has been wrongly tolerated for too long. I'm not sure why Weinstein was finally a tipping point (this is the first time I've really felt public tide turning), but I'm glad, and I hope it means the end of careers for lots of people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wikileaks is a dangerous organization, and I regret supporting it before I realized that it wouldn't just leak stuff from people I didn't like. Assange's ideology is based on radical transparency; I don't like hyperbole but I do believe that this could lead to collapse. This whole situation really is emblematic of the idea that there are no bad actions, only bad motives that is unfortunately becoming more and more common.

2 hours ago, Res said:

As a note on that article: Clinton was impeached and Louis CK has been rightly dropped by FX and HBO, had his premier canceled and, thankfully, I've seen a lot of outlets reject his so-called 'apology'. So I'm not sure either of them has normalized anything.

That being said; sure, there's abuse of power everywhere (and yes, there are a few female celebrities in positions of power who've also been accused), from politics to entertainment to religion; has been for decades, and a lot of it has been wrongly tolerated for too long. I'm not sure why Weinstein was finally a tipping point (this is the first time I've really felt public tide turning), but I'm glad, and I hope it means the end of careers for lots of people. 

Wait, what was the problem with his apology? I have seen a lot of extremely inadequate apologies from many people accused of stuff like this, and I didn't think his was one of them; it admitted to wrongdoing with no reservations, it made no excuses, etc. Now, obviously I agree with dropping his show and I personally don't think any apology is enough to completely make amends(he has to back it up with action and has to make things right with the individuals he hurt) but I saw nothing wrong with the apology itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, blah the Prussian said:

Wikileaks is a dangerous organization, and I regret supporting it before I realized that it wouldn't just leak stuff from people I didn't like. Assange's ideology is based on radical transparency; I don't like hyperbole but I do believe that this could lead to collapse. This whole situation really is emblematic of the idea that there are no bad actions, only bad motives that is unfortunately becoming more and more common.

I mean, what we've seen here is very evident that Assange doesn't care for transparency as much as he says he does. The fact that Wikileaks thought that Trump would get him appointed Australia's ambassador to the US is, aside from being fucking disgusting to me as an Australian citizen, emblematic of a rather extreme level of hypocrisy.

29 minutes ago, blah the Prussian said:

Wait, what was the problem with his apology? I have seen a lot of extremely inadequate apologies from many people accused of stuff like this, and I didn't think his was one of them; it admitted to wrongdoing with no reservations, it made no excuses, etc. Now, obviously I agree with dropping his show and I personally don't think any apology is enough to completely make amends(he has to back it up with action and has to make things right with the individuals he hurt) but I saw nothing wrong with the apology itself.

I think that's the point. News outlets rejecting his apology isn't down to anything wrong with the apology, and more saying that his apology isn't good enough. Which is absolutely true, but like you said, he's handling it better than others. *Cough cough* Kevin Spacey *cough cough*

Edited by Archer of Red
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Archer of Red said:

I mean, what we've seen here is very evident that Assange doesn't care for transparency as much as he says he does. The fact that Wikileaks thought that Trump would get him appointed Australia's ambassador to the US is, aside from being fucking disgusting to me as an Australian citizen, emblematic of a rather extreme level of hypocrisy.

I think that's the point. News outlets rejecting his apology isn't down to anything wrong with the apology, and more saying that his apology isn't good enough. Which is absolutely true, but like you said, he's handling it better than others. *Cough cough* Kevin Spacey *cough cough*

I feel like rejecting someone's apology is saying that their apology isn't good enough AS AN APOLOGY, though. Plus Res putting it in quotes suggests that he didn't apologize enough. Right now my attitude is "good apology, now work to make it right".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until as recently as last month he was still denying the allegations (and rumors have been floating around for years; I had heard enough to avoid his show) and he only wrote the apology once his hand was forced, and his ship was already sinking. His claims of self-reflection ring hollow with that knowledge.

It was better written than most, but it was the absolute bare minimum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, blah the Prussian said:

I feel like rejecting someone's apology is saying that their apology isn't good enough AS AN APOLOGY, though. Plus Res putting it in quotes suggests that he didn't apologize enough. Right now my attitude is "good apology, now work to make it right".

As Res mentioned above, his apology isn't bad in itself, but the context behind it basically ruins the gesture. If he actually starts working hard at redeeming himself in the eyes of the public, maybe I'll change my mind, but I'm not exactly holding my breath.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...