Not true. There are many women that hate women....other women.This is why it should have been Coney Barrett. Much less susceptible to smear campaigns, and we wouldn't have had to worry about Democrats claiming she hates women.
Not true. There are many women that hate women....other women.This is why it should have been Coney Barrett. Much less susceptible to smear campaigns, and we wouldn't have had to worry about Democrats claiming she hates women.
There is no way another confirmation would happen prior to the election.... Maybe in the lame duck.
And you jump to conclusions that Collins/Murkowski would ever vote for her. There is a reason she wasn't nominated the first time.....
Not true. There are many women that hate women....other women.
Now you are really being crazy.Well, you don't have to grope or assault them to get attention, you can simply interact with them, and communicate in other ways both verbal and not. It's not my fault you're socially dysfunctional and think that the best and only "move" is a sexual assault.
What are you a Republican?
The lame duck possibility would be fascinating.There is no way another confirmation would happen prior to the election.... Maybe in the lame duck.
And you jump to conclusions that Collins/Murkowski would ever vote for her. There is a reason she wasn't nominated the first time.....
And they'll vote for Kavanaugh now? Her anti-abortion rep isn't THAT much stronger than BK's.
Their is any number of reasons BK could have been nominated over her. Only one of which is that she might have been harder to confirm.
Yeah, but the point was also part the profile of women who falsely accuse men. And I think that is still pertinent .To improve the post, delete your reference to the Duke case -- a corrupt prosecutor was involved in that one. Defeats part of your post.
So ridiculous. If that’s what you got, you aren’t paying attention at all. Basically what is being said is don’t force yourself on women you don’t even know. Is that so hard?After having read through most of this goat F***ing thread and topic, I observe two things.
Crap like this is why the native Americans went alone to the sweat lodge to find knowledge
My grand son's will be taught to secretly video every sexual encounter, if they EVER in their life want to make it past McDonald's drive through.
and then some commentary.
This is a war, turned conflagration by the left.
Men/ boys, them girls are the actual devil.
Girls, you have 12 months to accuse anyone of anything, +1 day pull up your panties and be a part of the real world.
And in ending, Maybe this is why the Bible teaches that you only get the milk AFTER buying the cow. This has probably been the downfall of many societies in human history.
Monday should be very interesting. One word. Optics. If this woman is able to testify and seem credible, you will have a fired up group of women voters watching a panel of Republican Male Senators grilling a woman about her testimony regarding an attempted rape allegation. This will happen six weeks before a very important election. In my opinion, Kavanaugh is toast.
How far have things changed from when you wrote this post just a few days ago? But that’s the news cycle these days.So what's going to come of this?
Kavanagh has laid down the gauntlet that this never happened, and I guess claimed he wasn't even at said party.
They are both going to testify under oath? Something has to give here. What a circus.
Nope, I’m talking about a group. There’s an awful lot of women that don’t support other women.On an individual level maybe, but they'd look pretty silly labeling her a misogynist or as someone who doesn't respect women's rights.
So ridiculous. If that’s what you got, you aren’t paying attention at all. Basically what is being said is don’t force yourself on women you don’t even know. Is that so hard?
How far have things changed from when you wrote this post just a few days ago? But that’s the news cycle these days.
Girls, you have 12 months to accuse anyone of anything, +1 day pull up your panties and be a part of the real world.
And in ending, Maybe this is why the Bible teaches that you only get the milk AFTER buying the cow. This has probably been the downfall of many societies in human history.
Why do I have to tell you what a conversation with a women should look like? What a ridiculous but telling request. Hint: they're human, just like men, and most of them like sex too. If you don't have the inherent understanding of current social norms and.acceptable american mating rituals, I can't help you. But, you don't have to and shouldn't commit sexual assault or attempt rape to get laid. If you're clueless, just be patient, if you don't figure it when it's okay, she will tell you.Now you are really being crazy.
It isn't about getting "attention," interacting (whatever you think that vague word means), or communicating (Strother Martin/ Cool Hand Luke reference, maybe?). It's about how to tell if a female is willing or not, and what is that to be based on.
You haven't offered anything and don't tell us what a consent conversation should look like.
Nope, I’m talking about a group. There’s an awful lot of women that don’t support other women.
The lame duck possibility would be fascinating.
1. It only happens if the Dems win back the Senate.
2. It's a strict party line vote. No Democrat votes for any nominee in the lame duck session. That means the GOP can only lose one vote. The in-fighting will be a spectacle to watch.
3. The Dems and analysts of all stripes will cry fifty kinds of foul, but the math will demand the GOP take the heat and do it if they can. This one will leave scars.
Nope. It's much broader than this: "don’t force yourself on women you don’t even know." The news stories of the past few months include accusations of things like stealing kisses. Forcing yourself sounds a million times worse and even you would admit the accusations were never limited to matters involving women the accused "don't even know."So ridiculous. If that’s what you got, you aren’t paying attention at all. Basically what is being said is don’t force yourself on women you don’t even know. Is that so hard?
First of all, you seem to believe she will lie. If she lies, she will be penalized some way.An exception, I hope, would be that if she is willing to lie under oath, she not be believed for any fact ever and be jailed appropriately.
Don't trivialise the matter FFS.
This woman suffered emotional trauma so she sought help to get over this. The timing of when she brought this up is only important in that a vermin like this can be prevented from sitting on the highest court in the land.
I despise today's Republicans. You're drunk (probably) to say that.Why do I have to tell you what a conversation with a women should look like? What a ridiculous but telling request. Hint: they're human, just like men, and most of them like sex too. If you don't have the inherent understanding of current social norms and.acceptable american mating rituals, I can't help you. But, you don't have to and shouldn't commit sexual assault or attempt rape to get laid. If you're clueless, just be patient, if you don't figure it when it's okay, she will tell you.
fwiw - It's just like a conversation with a man, but generally with more variety, thought, and far less beer and football.... You are a republican. lol ..
Ok....don’t steal a kiss. Don’t kiss a woman that doesn’t want to be kissed. Don’t touch a woman in any sort of sexual way unless she gives you permission. It’s really not that hard.mThat’s a little sweet and incredibly naive to think men would comply if they only knew the rules. Some men, of course not all.Nope. It's much broader than this: "don’t force yourself on women you don’t even know." The news stories of the past few months include accusations of things like stealing kisses. Forcing yourself sounds a million times worse and even you would admit the accusations were never limited to matters involving women the accused "don't even know."
No doubt the rules have changed in the past 12-18 months but I think men would comply if they knew what the rules are.
Another possibility is that if indeed the party took place and K was proven to have been at the party. Since he has been insisting that he knew nothing about it, what would be the consequence?Monday should be very interesting. One word. Optics. If this woman is able to testify and seem credible, you will have a fired up group of women voters watching a panel of Republican Male Senators grilling a woman about her testimony regarding an attempted rape allegation. This will happen six weeks before a very important election. In my opinion, Kavanaugh is toast.
Disagree. 90 percent of the time, it’s a natural thing that anyone that knows how to read another person knows the right thing to do. And if you don’t, that’s when you ask. From everything TMP has said, I think he gets that. It really isn’t difficult. No doesn’t mean yes.I despise today's Republicans. You're drunk (probably) to say that.
But again, your post shows you don't know either what magic words need to be said to establish consent. Your observations that women are "human" and "just like men" and "most of them like sex too" makes you nothing more than a walking talking time bomb for your employer's HR department.
I'll leave it there and wait for your future posts about stuff you know about, like, basketball statistics and music history.
I'm basing that in part on what you said too -- 500 women with no problems, right? Instruction must work.Ok....don’t steal a kiss. Don’t kiss a woman that doesn’t want to be kissed. Don’t touch a woman in any sort of sexual way unless she gives you permission. It’s really not that hard.mThat’s a little sweet and incredibly naive to think men would comply if they only knew the rules. Some men, of course not all.
No is a word.Disagree. 90 percent of the time, it’s a natural thing that anyone that knows how to read another person knows the right thing to do. And if you don’t, that’s when you ask. From everything TMP has said, I think he gets that. It really isn’t difficult. No doesn’t mean yes.
Another possibility is that if indeed the party took place and K was proven to have been at the party. Since he has been insisting that he knew nothing about it, what would be the consequence?
I despise today's Republicans. You're drunk (probably) to say that.
But again, your post shows you don't know either what magic words need to be said to establish consent. Your observations that women are "human" and "just like men" and "most of them like sex too" makes you nothing more than a walking talking time bomb for your employer's HR department.
I'll leave it there and wait for your future posts about stuff you know about, like, basketball statistics and music history.
The political calculus on this is so complicated, I'm not sure there is a right read. Does Donnelly want the seat to not be open on Election Day? Probably. But does he also not want to have to vote one way or the other to make that happen? Certainly. Do the Repubs want to push through a nomination with baggage? No. Do they want to give voters a chance to respond to a failed nomination? Probably not really. It's lose-lose all around for both sides. Everyone is playing with political fire on this one.Yeah....if the Dems were to win back the Senate it would be ugly....unless the nominee was more of a consensus choice, I guess.
I'm torn on how this plays re: midterms. I think killing the Kavanagh nomination could actually motivate some conservative voters that may be otherwise a bit apathetic. I'm not sure Joe Donnelly (or insert red-state Dem) wants an open seat still sitting there come Nov.
But I'm not sure that's the right read at this point.
As a great man once said, when accused of sexual assault or other misdeeds by women, you've got to "deny, deny, deny,"You recall every party you went to as a kid? From 17-mid 20s I was at a party of some sort 1-2x per week. I'm a good bit younger than these people, and I certainly can't recall most of them. That's why the denial of not even being there is odd to me.....of course I think that all came 2nd hand via Hatch.
The political calculus on this is so complicated, I'm not sure there is a right read. Does Donnelly want the seat to not be open on Election Day? Probably. But does he also not want to have to vote one way or the other to make that happen? Certainly. Do the Repubs want to push through a nomination with baggage? No. Do they want to give voters a chance to respond to a failed nomination? Probably not really. It's lose-lose all around for both sides. Everyone is playing with political fire on this one.
Could be Monday is just another show of partisan bickering that doesn't resolve anything. But if Monday results in fireworks, this suddenly goes from one of the most contentious midterm campaigns in history to something much, much bigger.
You need to go back to discussing the history of music in the 16th century.It is a Gordian knot to you .."magic words" lol ... that's funny. "Hi" works for me ... you'll have n find your own.
Try talking to a woman, and instead of thinking of them as a woman, think of them as a human. and without mentioning football, or beer, (those are very boring topics) maybe then you'll get the insight you're seeking and woefully lacking. Instead of fronting, and manipulating, try being genuine and honest, it works wonders. You can't sneak or force yourself in...
I know that one.As a great man once said, when accused of sexual assault or other misdeeds by women, you've got to "deny, deny, deny,"
And?No is a word.Disagree. 90 percent of the time, it’s a natural thing that anyone that knows how to read another person knows the right thing to do. And if you don’t, that’s when you ask. From everything TMP has said, I think he gets that. It really isn’t difficult. No doesn’t mean yes.
You don't know the first thing about TMP if you think he's into 16th century music.You need to go back to discussing the history of music in the 16th century.
Your suggestions are no different than saying that a man can "read" a woman's thoughts by how she acts ("you'll get the insight you're seeking"). Trying to "read" a woman's thoughts is absolutely dangerous in today's world in the absence of her verbal confirmation, and God knows how you'd ever prove she verbally consented if she denies it 35 days or 35 years later.
Never thought I'd see a PC post from you, but this subject challenges all of us so it's OK.
Guys can talk to me about football and beer, but I’m weird that way.I despise today's Republicans. You're drunk (probably) to say that.
But again, your post shows you don't know either what magic words need to be said to establish consent. Your observations that women are "human" and "just like men" and "most of them like sex too" makes you nothing more than a walking talking time bomb for your employer's HR department.
I'll leave it there and wait for your future posts about stuff you know about, like, basketball statistics and music history.
It is a Gordian knot to you .."magic words" lol ... that's funny. "Hi" works for me ... you'll have to find your own.
Try talking to a woman, and instead of thinking of them as a woman, think of them as a human. and without mentioning football, or beer, (those are very boring topics) maybe then you'll get the insight you're seeking and woefully lacking. Instead of fronting, and manipulating, try being genuine and honest, it works wonders. You can't sneak or force yourself in...