|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 19, 2017 9:12:33 GMT -5
Well, the source for that story that Jezebel.com cites is the British newspaper the Sun, which is notorious for getting facts wrong, sensationalising everything and also just plain making stories up. So, I'd definitely take it with a pinch of salt. On the other hand, if it's true, I have a hard time seeing what the problem is. If consenting adults (which this article doesn't suggest they aren't) want to engage in BDSM relationships in some kindness of master/servant club together, what's wrong with that? I have friends who live that kind of lifestyle and some of what the lady in the relationship is made to do, on an almost daily basis, would make your jaw drop, but she's really getting off on it and it's entirely consensual, so who cares? Whatever floats your boat. The mock outrage and puritanical tone in that article is laughable and smacks of conservatism. That was my reading of it as well, it's certainly not my cup of tea but if it's consenting adults and it's their thing who cares? Maybe, but branding a person like they are cattle is a bit much. Nothing in the videos suggest that either Mack or Kreuk engaged in the sexual slavery aspect. It struck me as a organization that encourages people and possibly to create contacts in their respective businesses. Of course the "leader" will exploit whatever he can. That's what the Weinstein's of the world have been doing. I'm not into serious pain like branding, but some people are and if they're consenting adults that's their choice so I don't really see too much of an issue. |
|
Confessor
CCF Mod Squad
Not Bucky O'Hare!
Posts: 10,201 
|
Post by Confessor on Nov 19, 2017 9:55:06 GMT -5
Maybe, but branding a person like they are cattle is a bit much. For my tastes, yes, I agree, but if it's consensual and the women are getting off on it and want to be branded, what's the harm? It's not so different from being tattooed, in some respects. I don't know, I have a very live and let live attitude to anything done in a consensual sexual relationship. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 19, 2017 12:37:00 GMT -5
My thinking Is that it may be another organization exploiting confused and weak people. So how can it really be consent?
|
|
|
|
Post by Slam_Bradley on Nov 19, 2017 13:15:09 GMT -5
My thinking Is that it may be another organization exploiting confused and weak people. So how can it really be consent? If they're adults and they are mentally competent they can consent. It's that simple. |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 19, 2017 13:39:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Pharozonk on Nov 19, 2017 17:00:02 GMT -5
My thinking Is that it may be another organization exploiting confused and weak people. So how can it really be consent? The problem is deciding who gets to determine whether someone can consent to that or not. At least with age of consent laws, you can set a hard number on that. Outside of that, it gets rather murky and nebulous. |
|
|
|
Post by Phil Maurice on Nov 19, 2017 21:14:31 GMT -5
"If they're adults and they are mentally competent they can consent. It's that simple. " --Sylvester McMonkey McBean  |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 19, 2017 21:30:41 GMT -5
Well, the source for that story that Jezebel.com cites is the British newspaper the Sun, which is notorious for getting facts wrong, sensationalising everything and also just plain making stories up. So, I'd definitely take it with a pinch of salt. On the other hand, if it's true, I have a hard time seeing what the problem is. If consenting adults (which this article doesn't suggest they aren't) want to engage in BDSM relationships in some kind of master/servant club together, what's wrong with that? I have friends who live that kind of lifestyle and some of what the lady in the relationship is made to do, on an almost daily basis, would make your jaw drop, but she's really getting off on it and it's entirely consensual, so who cares? Whatever floats your boat. The mock outrage and puritanical tone in that article is laughable and smacks of conservatism. In the Sun? I'm shocked! |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 20, 2017 5:26:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Randle-El on Nov 20, 2017 15:17:37 GMT -5
Well, the source for that story that Jezebel.com cites is the British newspaper the Sun, which is notorious for getting facts wrong, sensationalising everything and also just plain making stories up. So, I'd definitely take it with a pinch of salt. On the other hand, if it's true, I have a hard time seeing what the problem is. If consenting adults (which this article doesn't suggest they aren't) want to engage in BDSM relationships in some kind of master/servant club together, what's wrong with that? I have friends who live that kind of lifestyle and some of what the lady in the relationship is made to do, on an almost daily basis, would make your jaw drop, but she's really getting off on it and it's entirely consensual, so who cares? Whatever floats your boat. The mock outrage and puritanical tone in that article is laughable and smacks of conservatism. Here is a story from the NYTimes that, while not naming Allison Mack specifically, corroborates some of the claims made in the article I linked. www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/nyregion/nxivm-women-branded-albany.htmlI'll concede that it's a different story if all of the activity is truly consensual. However, both articles seem to indicate that there is at least some coercion or manipulation going on. I would add that when it comes to cults, "consensual" is a slippery description. |
|
|
|
Post by thwhtguardian on Nov 20, 2017 16:32:57 GMT -5
Well, the source for that story that Jezebel.com cites is the British newspaper the Sun, which is notorious for getting facts wrong, sensationalising everything and also just plain making stories up. So, I'd definitely take it with a pinch of salt. On the other hand, if it's true, I have a hard time seeing what the problem is. If consenting adults (which this article doesn't suggest they aren't) want to engage in BDSM relationships in some kind of master/servant club together, what's wrong with that? I have friends who live that kind of lifestyle and some of what the lady in the relationship is made to do, on an almost daily basis, would make your jaw drop, but she's really getting off on it and it's entirely consensual, so who cares? Whatever floats your boat. The mock outrage and puritanical tone in that article is laughable and smacks of conservatism. Here is a story from the NYTimes that, while not naming Allison Mack specifically, corroborates some of the claims made in the article I linked. www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/nyregion/nxivm-women-branded-albany.htmlI'll concede that it's a different story if all of the activity is truly consensual. However, both articles seem to indicate that there is at least some coercion or manipulation going on. I would add that when it comes to cults, "consensual" is a slippery description. Still doesn't sound anywhere near criminal. |
|
|
|
Post by codystarbuck on Nov 20, 2017 23:13:07 GMT -5
Jeez, now allegations about Jeffrey Tambor and Carlie Rose. The Rose ones sound pretty damning (lewd phone calls, groping, walking around naked in front of accusers) and there are multiple people making accusations or witnessed behavior, while Tambor denies any harassment, though apologizes for inappropriate behavior.
Seriously guys, the rules of etiquette are pretty clear; you keep your pants zipped, no means no, you keep it out of the workplace, you don't masturbate in front of anyone who is not in a consensual relationship with you, same for naked (unless you happen to bump into people in a locker room or are undergoing a medical physical) and you don't play grab-ass. And "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you," wasn't describing sexual acts.
A lot of the stuff that has come out could have been dealt with a long time ago, had employers treated things seriously, regardless of how lightly they perceived the behavior. While I was in the military, there were some harassment scandals (the Tailhook incident being the biggest, within the Navy). The Navy's method of dealing with it was making everyone watch a rather badly created training film about sexual harassment, that presented nothing but glaringly obvious examples of sexual harassment; but, didn't even broach hostile environments, off-color jokes, lewd language, gray areas or anything that might have actually been of real value to discuss. My mouth dropped open when I heard my immediate superior, complain about women onboard another ship, referring to it as a "bitch boat." He was a black man who held a naval commission, that was made possible by desegregation of the Navy, yet didn't seem to think that women should get the same opportunities. I heard similar statements and off-color jokes from other officers, who I mostly respected, which knocked them down more than a few pegs, in my young eyes.
After Tailhook, the officers of the base had to sit through a lecture by the commanding admiral, which threw blame on junior officers exercising poor judgement and leadership, at the event. I kept my mouth shut (arguing with an admiral, in any circumstances, had severe consequences); but was itching to ask about the reports of officers of rank Lt Commander up to admiral who were present at the convention and partook of the activities going on; activities that they helped pass down to the generation that followed. Where was the leadership there? Those junior officers followed the example that had been set by their superiors. I still blame the junior officers for their lack of taste and ethics, not to mention judgement; but, they were hardly the instigators. I had already decided to resign after my commitment was up; but, stuff like that, the USS Iowa incident and the general handling of the Gulf War (behind the scenes) really soured me on a naval career.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob Allen on Nov 21, 2017 1:35:33 GMT -5
My wife is a retired Air Force officer. She read codystarbuck's post and dictated this response: "No matter how bad the training film was, the point of the film with regard to very obvious sexual molestation and rape is still relevant. People are still doing very obvious sexual misconduct. I served during a war (1972). My very first boss was a full colonel who demanded sex when I reported for duty. He was about to retire and I didn't know my way around, so I had a lot of sex with him and didn't try to do anything about it. I was NOT going to give up my job and my pension. When he left I was given my choice of jobs. I left HQ and moved to a base position only to find that the supervisor of my department planned to get sex from me too. I did the usual evasive moves and finally went to the IG. The IG informed me that anywhere I went in the military or corporate worlds it would be the same, and it wasn't their problem. Instead I found another junior officer to be my bodyguard. This was a guy who looked like he should be playing football but actually never had. He was prior service, though. We figured out where in the building I would be most at risk, and that's where he either tailed me or escorted me. One day I got a few steps too far ahead of him and my supervisor picked me up and pushed me against the wall in a hallway. He was so intent on what he was doing that he didn't notice my bodyguard approaching. He picked my supervisor up by the nape of his neck and threatened to deck him if he ever had to do it again. I was pretty shaken and told other women. That's how I found out that my supervisor was regularly extracting sex from civilian women employees whose husbands had been drafted and were overseas fighting. I eventually learned my way around, learned how to prevent these problems, and learned how to protect other women. As much I would like the subtleties to be addressed, while we're fighting a war there's nothing subtle about the sexual exploitation of women in wartime." |
|
|
|
Post by Icctrombone on Nov 21, 2017 6:30:36 GMT -5
My wife is a retired Air Force officer. She read codystarbuck 's post and dictated this response: "No matter how bad the training film was, the point of the film with regard to very obvious sexual molestation and rape is still relevant. People are still doing very obvious sexual misconduct. I served during a war (1972). My very first boss was a full colonel who demanded sex when I reported for duty. He was about to retire and I didn't know my way around, so I had a lot of sex with him and didn't try to do anything about it. I was NOT going to give up my job and my pension. When he left I was given my choice of jobs. I left HQ and moved to a base position only to find that the supervisor of my department planned to get sex from me too. I did the usual evasive moves and finally went to the IG. The IG informed me that anywhere I went in the military or corporate worlds it would be the same, and it wasn't their problem. Instead I found another junior officer to be my bodyguard. This was a guy who looked like he should be playing football but actually never had. He was prior service, though. We figured out where in the building I would be most at risk, and that's where he either tailed me or escorted me. One day I got a few steps too far ahead of him and my supervisor picked me up and pushed me against the wall in a hallway. He was so intent on what he was doing that he didn't notice my bodyguard approaching. He picked my supervisor up by the nape of his neck and threatened to deck him if he ever had to do it again. I was pretty shaken and told other women. That's how I found out that my supervisor was regularly extracting sex from civilian women employees whose husbands had been drafted and were overseas fighting. I eventually learned my way around, learned how to prevent these problems, and learned how to protect other women. As much I would like the subtleties to be addressed, while we're fighting a war there's nothing subtle about the sexual exploitation of women in wartime." Absolutely terrible. And I believe every word. All these stories of sexual misconduct have a common thread that someone with power/authority does inappropriate things and because of fear, the victims kept quiet. " Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" |
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Nov 21, 2017 6:44:52 GMT -5
My wife is a retired Air Force officer. She read codystarbuck 's post and dictated this response: "No matter how bad the training film was, the point of the film with regard to very obvious sexual molestation and rape is still relevant. People are still doing very obvious sexual misconduct. I served during a war (1972). My very first boss was a full colonel who demanded sex when I reported for duty. He was about to retire and I didn't know my way around, so I had a lot of sex with him and didn't try to do anything about it. I was NOT going to give up my job and my pension. When he left I was given my choice of jobs. I left HQ and moved to a base position only to find that the supervisor of my department planned to get sex from me too. I did the usual evasive moves and finally went to the IG. The IG informed me that anywhere I went in the military or corporate worlds it would be the same, and it wasn't their problem. Instead I found another junior officer to be my bodyguard. This was a guy who looked like he should be playing football but actually never had. He was prior service, though. We figured out where in the building I would be most at risk, and that's where he either tailed me or escorted me. One day I got a few steps too far ahead of him and my supervisor picked me up and pushed me against the wall in a hallway. He was so intent on what he was doing that he didn't notice my bodyguard approaching. He picked my supervisor up by the nape of his neck and threatened to deck him if he ever had to do it again. I was pretty shaken and told other women. That's how I found out that my supervisor was regularly extracting sex from civilian women employees whose husbands had been drafted and were overseas fighting. I eventually learned my way around, learned how to prevent these problems, and learned how to protect other women. As much I would like the subtleties to be addressed, while we're fighting a war there's nothing subtle about the sexual exploitation of women in wartime." Absolutely terrible. And I believe every word. All these stories of sexual misconduct have a common thread that someone with power/authority does inappropriate things and because of fear, the victims kept quiet. " Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" Rob's wife's story, I'm sure, could be repeated almost verbatim by any countless number of women, and it gives the answer to the question "well, why didn't she say something when it happened?" She, whomever "she" may be, didn't say anything because the culture of her workplace allowed it. She didn't say anything because "she" was a 16 year-old girl who had a respected 30-something man in a position of power tell her no one would believe her. She didn't say something because "she" was a lowly production assistant who needed to not only make rent that month but who also didn't want to get blackballed by the industry for being a troublemaker. She didn't say something because "she" felt ashamed and guilty that maybe she had led the man on and that him groping her wasn't really a big deal. This is not a woman problem. It's a man problem, because for too long, power and privilege have gone unchecked and unchallenged. The conqueror takes what he wants and woe be to anyone who gets in his way of his pursuits. We have to be the generation that ends that, for the sake of our wives, sisters, daughters, granddaughters, and every other woman on the planet. If Hollywood and Washington burn over this, that might be the best thing that could happen. |
|
