Advertisement
by The Alma Mater » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:20 am
Arumbia67 wrote:I don't understand the obsession over this. The man doesn't want his image smeared, so what?
by Novus America » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:27 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Arumbia67 wrote:I don't understand the obsession over this. The man doesn't want his image smeared, so what?
People want to make certain that HIS attitude is seen as the odd one; instead of accepting the suggestion that it is not normal for men and women to hang out together. That men and women being friends is something which is odd and should be viewed with suspicion.
Considering quite a few people in this very thread already seem to be think along the lines of view number 2 I fear it might be too little too late though.
by The Alma Mater » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:29 am
Novus America wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
People want to make certain that HIS attitude is seen as the odd one; instead of accepting the suggestion that it is not normal for men and women to hang out together. That men and women being friends is something which is odd and should be viewed with suspicion.
Considering quite a few people in this very thread already seem to be think along the lines of view number 2 I fear it might be too little too late though.
Being a politician in modern America literally everything you do is viewed with suspicion. So who could blame him for that?
His motive seems odd perhaps but his caution is certainly 100% justifiable. I would be less concerned about temptation, and more worried about CNN making up a scandal or being sued for sexual harassment even if you did nothing.
It is not paranoia when in his case literally tens of millions are out to get you.
by The Californian South » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:31 am
by Novus America » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:34 am
The Alma Mater wrote:Novus America wrote:
Being a politician in modern America literally everything you do is viewed with suspicion. So who could blame him for that?
His motive seems odd perhaps but his caution is certainly 100% justifiable. I would be less concerned about temptation, and more worried about CNN making up a scandal or being sued for sexual harassment even if you did nothing.
It is not paranoia when in his case literally tens of millions are out to get you.
The problem is that the average Joe (or at least, many of the people posting here who I assume are not all VPs as well) also seem to believe it is odd if a man and a woman "hang out" for non-professional reasons. Actions like these ofc only reinforce that idea.
by Gauthier » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:37 am
The Californian South wrote:Republicans probably have an unusually high level of testosterone tbh
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:46 am
Aquesta wrote:Pence is a solid guy. And it would be very illogical for someone to criticise for doing this.
by Novus America » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:57 am
Grave_n_idle wrote:Aquesta wrote:Pence is a solid guy. And it would be very illogical for someone to criticise for doing this.
It would be illogical for someone NOT to criticise.
The guy is the Vice President of the US - his job is basically meeting with people. If he's saying he can't meet with people if they happen to be women, that is a position that SHOULD be criticised.
by Twilight Imperium » Thu Apr 06, 2017 10:57 am
by Frank Zipper » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:01 am
by Dread Lady Nathicana » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:18 am
by Twilight Imperium » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:23 am
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Look. Don't like the guy. Don't trust the guy. But sure as shit not desperate enough to start scraping the bottom of the barrel to mock him for taking steps to be above reproach. Hell of a lot better than the guys who are all talk, then get caught in the men's room getting jerked off by some young stud, or in flagrante delicto with their honey in the Hamptons, neh?
ffs, people ... if you weren't already convinced our politics had reached critical levels of stupid way back when they were comparing penis sizes during a presidential debate?
"Here's yer sign."
by Shamhnan Insir » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:29 am
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Look. Don't like the guy. Don't trust the guy. But sure as shit not desperate enough to start scraping the bottom of the barrel to mock him for taking steps to be above reproach. Hell of a lot better than the guys who are all talk, then get caught in the men's room getting jerked off by some young stud, or in flagrante delicto with their honey in the Hamptons, neh?
ffs, people ... if you weren't already convinced our politics had reached critical levels of stupid way back when they were comparing penis sizes during a presidential debate?
"Here's yer sign."
Darwinish Brentsylvania wrote:Shamhnan Insir started this wonderful tranquility, ALL PRAISE THE SHEPHERD KING
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:35 am
Novus America wrote:He can meet with people. Just he prefers to have someone else there.
Novus America wrote:Which is a smart legal position,
Novus America wrote:One on one meetings with someone of the opposite gender in his position is a bad idea, because again literally millions such a you are out to get him.
Novus America wrote:I would be more worried about fake news
Novus America wrote:But for added safety and equality he should apply it to men as well.
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:39 am
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Look. Don't like the guy. Don't trust the guy. But sure as shit not desperate enough to start scraping the bottom of the barrel to mock him for taking steps to be above reproach. Hell of a lot better than the guys who are all talk, then get caught in the men's room getting jerked off by some young stud, or in flagrante delicto with their honey in the Hamptons, neh?
by Novus America » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:48 am
Grave_n_idle wrote:Novus America wrote:He can meet with people. Just he prefers to have someone else there.
That's not what he said.Novus America wrote:Which is a smart legal position,
Whether or not it's a smart legal position is somewhat irrelevant.Novus America wrote:One on one meetings with someone of the opposite gender in his position is a bad idea, because again literally millions such a you are out to get him.
Wait, what?
Don't start conjuring up bullshit. Where did I say I was out to get him?Novus America wrote:I would be more worried about fake news
Don't be ridiculous. 'Fake news' is fake news.Novus America wrote:But for added safety and equality he should apply it to men as well.
If he'd have said he never met ANYONE without someone attending, there'd probably never have been a story.
But he specified women, which is discriminatory. At best.
by Zocra » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:53 am
by Grave_n_idle » Thu Apr 06, 2017 11:54 am
Novus America wrote:How is doing the legally smart thing bad?
Novus America wrote:And do not pretend you would not love any reason, real or imagined to remove him from office.
Novus America wrote:Yes fake news is fake news, and being falsely accused of sexual harassment or adultery would be fake news. He should want to avoid that.
Novus America wrote:He knows full well how the game is played and that the modern media is hyper partisan
Novus America wrote:I do see why limiting it only to women could be an issue though.
by The Alma Mater » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:04 pm
Novus America wrote:The Alma Mater wrote:
The problem is that the average Joe (or at least, many of the people posting here who I assume are not all VPs as well) also seem to believe it is odd if a man and a woman "hang out" for non-professional reasons. Actions like these ofc only reinforce that idea.
Well even for the average Joe there is still a danger in hanging out with someone of the opposite sex who is your employee.
As long as they are not your employee you should probably okay though.
The average Joe needs not to live in sheer terror all the time, but still you have to watch out for the appearance of impropriety, even when nothing is wrong.
by The Lone Alliance » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:04 pm
by Ashmoria » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:04 pm
Aquesta wrote:Pence is a solid guy. And it would be very illogical for someone to criticise for doing this.
by New haven america » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:04 pm
Dread Lady Nathicana wrote:Look. Don't like the guy. Don't trust the guy. But sure as shit not desperate enough to start scraping the bottom of the barrel to mock him for taking steps to be above reproach.
by Ashmoria » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:07 pm
Novus America wrote:Grave_n_idle wrote:
That's not what he said.
Whether or not it's a smart legal position is somewhat irrelevant.
Wait, what?
Don't start conjuring up bullshit. Where did I say I was out to get him?
Don't be ridiculous. 'Fake news' is fake news.
If he'd have said he never met ANYONE without someone attending, there'd probably never have been a story.
But he specified women, which is discriminatory. At best.
How is doing the legally smart thing bad?
And do not pretend you would not love any reason, real or imagined to remove him from office.
Yes fake news is fake news, and being falsely accused of sexual harassment or adultery would be fake news. He should want to avoid that.
He knows full well how the game is played and that the modern media is hyper partisan and prone to just making shit up or reporting even the flimsiest accusations without a shrewd of real evidence beyond alleged anonymous hearsay.
And yes both parties do this.
I do see why limiting it only to women could be an issue though.
by New haven america » Thu Apr 06, 2017 12:11 pm
Anagonia wrote:New haven america wrote:You're missing the point.
Taking this "View" of morality shows that Pence either: A) Doesn't have faith in himself, or B) Doesn't have faith in others. As stated by CTOAN earlier, either Pence thinks that he's just so fucking irresistible that without his wife around all women would pounce on him given the opportunity, or he thinks that without his chaperone (His wife) then he won't have the self-control to not fuck the nearest female, both of which paint him in a really bad light.
This also creates an administration problem, seeing as his female coworkers will have a harder time working with him than his male coworkers.
I'd just like to add that I find this view particularly toxic to any religion. Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc... who decide to do things like this are just showing that they either have no self-control or have insanely massive egos.
Thank you for taking the time for your reply, New Haven America.
I had to think long on how to reply, how to address your accusations presented. It's a common theme in this thread, and one I have a hard time wrapping my head around because I don't think the necessary way to comprehend how someone can come to this conclusion. I state earnestly that this is not an insult. Instead, it represents the way I was grown up, the manner, and the way I view the world. It's an individual viewpoint that, when overlayed with the common theme in this thread, seems contrasting.
I believe the best way I can go about my rebuttal in the safest possible manner is to ask a question. The question is, with the choices you provided to explain his statement, have you considered a another possibility that he was being truthful? I ask this because it appears your placing your own biased - and I'm not trying to accuse here - of what you view society as on Mr. Pence. I agree there are things I disagree with him, but I state this because you seem to fail to provide the alternative where no harm was intended.
I feel your choices present harm to his character, or are intended to, due to some bias. I don't feel you provide leeway for a neutral point of view. Therefore why I asked my question to clarify before I stated any further my position on the subject to avoid any unnecessary hurt feelings.
For clarification purposes, I'll restate my question. With the choices you provided to explain his statement (Mr. Pence), have you considered another possibility that he was being truthful?
Thank you for your time.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Emotional Support Crocodile, Likhinia, ML Library, Tungstan
Advertisement