It's when you lean forward to kiss a woman, and she pulls away. In other words, we've all done it.
If you've never tried it, you've probably never kissed a girl. And you certainly haven't gotten laid.
How can a guy know ahead of time whether the female will be receptive? She may be extremely flirtatious, then decide at the last minute to play coy. That has been known to happen.
So, from now on, only virgins will be allowed to run.
Adam Lanza for President!
The idea that Donald Trump is now guilty of "sexual assault," while Bill Clinton's actual rapes are overlooked, is indicative of how biased our media are.
Trump tried to kiss a woman who wasn't receptive. Well, that definitely disqualifies him from being President.
Personally, I've probably insulted more women by not making a pass than by making one. A woman you make a pass at, even if she turns you down, will tend to regard you fondly afterward. A woman who expects a pass, and doesn't get one, will never forgive you. She may even tell her friends that she thinks you're gay. (I've had that happen.)
Or, she may just lie and tell her friends you made a pass at her. (I've had that happen as well.)
My guess is, that's what happened with at least one or two of the women who are now claiming that Trump made an unwanted sexual advance at them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
I argued that what Trump said was more serious than you made out but now after seeing the mainstream verdict, I've become irritated enough by the bias to argue the other way. It wasn't that bad, was it? Trump BAD, no nuance allowed. For some reason, deep down, I find myself rooting for Trump- maybe I'm just a contrarian.
Steven --
Yes, as far as the mainstream media is concerned, Trump is the Devil, Ted Bundy, and Adolf Hitler rolled into one.
I hope a lot of people share your feelings.
Hopefully the shy conservative is a phenomenon in the culturally more liberal states, as it is in England. Polls can be off. I can't see a Trump win but we'll have to wait for the day.
Steven --
I can't see Trump winning either, especially with all the electoral fraud that I think will take place, especially in the big cities and swing states.
Making sure one person has one vote is a no brainer.
People who think they have the moral high ground are dangerous because they will feel justified to not fight fairly. Ironically, utopians are always the most dangerous people.
Trump's accusations are presented in the guardian as dark paranoia. Trump manages to have good instincts and voice real concerns without quite being articulate enough to really stick it to the opposition. I've always felt he just isn't quite the great man you need.
Steven --
Yes, it's too bad he's not more articulate. The thing is, even if he were, the media would still do their best to make him look bad.
A UN document that relies on EEOC guidelines asks:
What Is Sexual Harassment?
Sexual harassment includes many things...
-Rape
-Unwanted sexual looks
-Looking a person up and down
-Staring at someone
I'm reading a book about a (South Asian) Indian math prodigy. In the early 1900s, Indians of a lower caste were forbidden to look at or make eye contact with someone of a superior caste. I suppose violators would have been guilty of caste harassment. Punishment was severe. Today men are expected to look away if a woman is approaching. Best to keep your eyes on the ground in the manner of a low-caste Indian. Also be on guard that your shadow does not touch theirs.
Mark --
Being forbidden to look upon something is always the mark of either an extremely repressive society or someone with an extremely narcissistic outlook. In Japan before WWII you weren't supposed to look at the Emperor, and if he passed by, you were supposed to lower your head to the ground. One of the things that came out before Martha Stewart's trial for insider trading was that workmen around her house were not allowed to look her in the eye. (That, to me, was one of the things that made clear that she was a sociopath.) And the example you use, of a low caste Indian not allowed to look at a higher caste one.
The attempted criminalizing of looking at women shows just how insane and repressive model certain elements of Western society are becoming.
I might be repeating what you had posted a few weeks ago, but you see this sociopathic, reigning sovereign attitude in Her Royal Highness, Queen Hillary:
Within the White House, Hillary had a “standing rule that no one spoke to her when she was going from one location to another,” says former FBI agent Coy Copeland. “In fact, anyone who would see her coming would just step into the first available office.” One former Secret Service agent states, “If Hillary was walking down a hall, you were supposed to hide behind drapes used as partitions” (NY Post).
I assume underlings who were not to speak to Dear Leader were forbidden from making eye contact too. It all sounds like a parody of Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado set in the present day.
Mark --
I've seen that, but didn't think I used it in the sociopath alert about Hillary. But yes, it's a perfect illustration of her personality. Just as when a Secret Service agent -- who had pledged to give his life to save hers -- passed her in the corridor and said, "Good morning, ma'am," and she screeched back, "Fuck off!" (That happened with the Arkansas State Troopers, too.)
I wonder if this is where the idea of Medusa sprang up. Actually, since writing that last sentence, I Google-imaged "Hillary as Medusa," and it seems a number of people have already had that idea.
I agree w/Steve about the comment, and it just goes to show how incredibly fucked up the make believe world of the media is.
I began to wake up when I read the Jamie Lee Curtis quote I linked to earlier. I laughed. Someone from HOLLYWOOD puffing herself up like a middle-class church lady saying, "how dare he!" At least the church lady herself is probably as tightly wound as she wants the rest of us to be (even if the pastor is fucking the secretary). But Jamie Lee Curtis? Gimme a break.
I worked in a bunch of offices in various towns during my youth. The working class women were incredibly crude and would not bat an eyelash at Trump's comments. During my last stint pictures of Brittany Spear's pussy were on the internet. They all laughed and looked at the pics on the internet. At work. They enjoyed themselves. It *was* funny.
No one is shocked by Trump's comments. The SJWs are just lying, that's all.
Puzzled
Puzzled --
Yes, for the Hollywood types to act like Victorians when it suits them is awfully transparent. Where were all of these proper church-going God-fearing prudes when Bill Clinton was being accused of rape, or of having sex with one of his interns?
John,
The issue of fraud is serious. It deserves the highest scrutiny. But to me the real fraud consists of:
1. Changing the demographics of a country via law (1965)
2. Flooding nice (ie white) neighborhoods with Section 8 and refugees (except in places like Chappauqua)
3. Reversing state legislation by Federal judges
4. Making everything into a legal battle, which ultimately gets decided by one vote on the Supreme Court, and saying, 'Case closed. Forever.' (Except in cases where the left lost, such as Dred Scott and Plessy. I disagreed with both those decisions, but that's my point, in a republican system, nothing should ever be cased closed.)
IMO, that's the read fraud.
Puzzled
Puzzled --
Yes, those are all much bigger issues than whether someone tried t kiss someone else. Unfortunately, the only thing we hear about through the MSM is Trump's sexual assaults, so this election will be decided on unwanted kisses. So the larger fraud can continue.
John,
What I meant was that those issues are bigger than the voter fraud Schulkin was talking about.
Unwanted sexual advances should be a total non-issue.
Puzzled
Puzzled --
Aha, yes, you're absolutely right.
Scott Adams' post today kinda captures it well. The "sexual assaults" are just another pink elephant. I definitely feel this way a lot living in a neighborhood of like 99% Democrats.
Jokah --
That's the second Scott Adams post I've read in as many days, and while I've never read Dilbert, just after those two posts I have a lot of respect for Adams. He obviously thinks very clearly, and explains things well (meaning, simply and straightforwardly).
Thank your forwarding that.
You, like a lot of commenters here, seem to be surrounded by the enemy. Are you, like some of the other commenters, in the closet about your political leanings in your neighborhood?
Oh, absolutely in the closet. I'm used to it by now and don't even let comments like "I don't see how anyone can support Trump" phase me since I like having friends more than having drawn out arguments that convince no one.
But yeah, Roy Cooper lives less than a block from me.
Just to close the circle, Hillary does indeed forbid the help from looking at her (not just speaking to her): “When I first met her, we were given specific instructions: don’t look at her, don’t look at her general direction and if you need to talk to her, keep it short and stay out of her way,” the agent told The [NY] Post. The agent was one of Hillary's security guards when she was Secretary of State in 2009.
Jokah --
True enough about the arguments. I'm sort of hoping there are a lot of invisible Trump supporters like you.
Funny, Cooper's home page there doesn't even mention the word "Democrat," nor does his positions page. You actually have to read through his positions before you see which party he belongs to. I also notice that he doesn't mention the issue of immigration anywhere on his positions page.
Somehow I'd been under the impression you lived in the Midwest somewhere, not NC.
Mark --
Wow. I hadn't heard that before. Amazing. And right in character, so, maybe not so amazing. She really is Medusa, come to life.
I just looked up Roy Cooper's website. Now, I can make out several facts:
1. Education - he's in favor of it.
2. Jobs and Economy - he's in favor of them.
3. Health Care - he's in favor of good health.
4. Environment - he's in favor of it. We need an environment.
5. Voting Rights - he's in favor of it.
Roy appears to be anatomically male. He presents as a man. He called himself a "family man." That may be transphobic.
Am I right about that?
Puzzled
Puzzled --
It's How he supports them that gives him away.
1. He's against vouchers and the effective "resegregation" of schooling.
3. He's in favor of expanding Medicaid.
5. He's for same day registration.
That's just what I remember from reading that site, I'm not about to reread it, but those are all Democratic positions.
Gotcha.
I think soon it won't make a difference, as the Republican party will fall apart.
Puzzled
Post a Comment