This is where the "those that choose not to" line gets thrown around which belies the fact that it's little more than a word switch from prior posts a thread ago. You're correct though, in both respects it's not only inaccurate but gross.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
We need to have a talk on how we treat sexual assault victims on this site
- Thread starter Xaszatm
- Start date
- Status
Your request was for Biden to clear his name. How does this do that?
And continuing to run like nothing happened does? What do you think?
he addressed the accusation and requested that reporters investigate it.
He has fully cooperated. What else could he possibly do to address the accusations?
It shouldn't be that difficult to make a case for Joe Biden's presidency without shaming and berating people who have been assaulted, yet that has been difficult for many here. Rape has been tossed around as if it is a light crime. The same people who cried "Believe Women!" when Dr. Ford made her case about Kavanaugh are silent now or are actively complicit in the attempts to silence those who seek to make note of the fact that Joe Biden has groped women and children along with making them uncomfortable before Reade's story came out. People unironically saying that we can't believe her because she supported Bernie Sanders, people saying that Reade shouldn't be believed, this is absurd and sad. Especially from people who claim to care about women being believed when they say they are assaulted.
It is possible to make your case without implying that people are cowardly for being victims of sexual assault and not wanting to vote for a rapist. This is a disgrace.
It is possible to make your case without implying that people are cowardly for being victims of sexual assault and not wanting to vote for a rapist. This is a disgrace.
You do you, first and foremost. Take care of yourself and stay safe. Take a break, put the forum on ignore and focus on doing some other things you enjoy for a bit. Isn't worth the stress.
Stepping down until investigations are over? But of course it's more important to him that he's the nominee.
Last edited:
This is what gets to me the most. They supported Ford and did the whole 'believe women' song and dance until it was their 'team', then they turned right around and started treating Reade the same way republicans treated Ford. Called her a liar right out the gate, made up conspires about her motives, and are doing everything they can to discredit her because if you were sexuality assaulted you must be a perfect victim who did absolutely everything right or you're a lying bitch. Believe women my ass. Fucking hypocrites. Lesser of two evils indeed.
I've said it before but, it's easy to believe women when it doesn't involve your political party and effectively use it as a political chess piece. It's very difficult, to hold onto those same beliefs when it's someone in your political party or in this case your nominee being accused of sexual assault/rape.
All this really tells me, is that those who don't believe Reade and are instead trying to wiggle their way out of this by accusing her of being a Russian plant or Bernie bros, didn't really believe in those beliefs and principles to begin with.
Dr. Ford's story and Tara Reade's story were both broken by the intercept and have just as much evidence that the assaults occured yet a lot of the people here claiming to be dems managed to try and find every reason not to believe Tara Reade but believed Ford with no problem. It is disgusting to see people who claim/claimed to care about women be actively complicit in the silencing of a woman over an election when it is still possible(although improbable) to get Biden to step down because a rapist should not be on the ballot for president, just because the GOP didn't care doesn't mean that it should be the same for people who call themselves democrats.
You should really go back and look at what the Intercept was reporting vis a vis Dr. Ford. They were not giving her a platform with which to tell her story - Ryan Grim wrote a story accusing Dianne Feinstein of hiding a letter from members of her committee (the letter she was hiding was from Ford, as she wanted to be anonymous was instead forced into the public eye as news about her letter went public and people began looking into it.)
I'm not really interested in getting involved in the actual topic at hand, but the Intercept should not be credited for Ford's story.
All this tell me is that a lot of "supporters" for #MeToo was clearly doing so on a conditional basis. Their support for victims only goes as far as if it is useful as a bludgeon against their political and ideological opponents. The moment #MeToo hits too close to their "team," throw it in the trash and/or downplay its importance. I hate to use the term "virtue signaling" but that what it feel like that's what a lot of these people engaged in when I see the whiplash from them going from "believe women" to "Maybe Reade is a Russian bot." in just a few weeks.
Got you, thanks for the info. I completely forgot about all that and just remembered it coming from Grimm, not that it really changes the greater point but it is nice to be fully informed.
I don't know everything that's going on as I don't frequent as much as I used to, however I have seen quite a few "Not voting for X is a vote for Y."
I have and never will like a response like that. I can't tell you who to vote for just like nobody can tell me who to vote for. At the end of the day it is a choice we all get to make on our own.
If that choice ends up being that you don't fill in the circle on the top of ballot because the candidates make you uncomfortable and even more so it is related to something traumatic in your life? That's your right to do so and go ahead and do just that.
I would never hold that against someone. Especially in a case like what OP is speaking to. This is something following both candidates and you can't just tell someone to basically suck it up, hold their nose and fill in that circle.
I have and never will like a response like that. I can't tell you who to vote for just like nobody can tell me who to vote for. At the end of the day it is a choice we all get to make on our own.
If that choice ends up being that you don't fill in the circle on the top of ballot because the candidates make you uncomfortable and even more so it is related to something traumatic in your life? That's your right to do so and go ahead and do just that.
I would never hold that against someone. Especially in a case like what OP is speaking to. This is something following both candidates and you can't just tell someone to basically suck it up, hold their nose and fill in that circle.
But
a) What investigations are occurring right now?
b) What investigations are not occurring now that can only occur when he steps down?
It sure is weird that for some people who don't want to politicize this, there's a politicization of it by others saying that Biden should step down in order to conduct investigations. As though he could then just become nominee again afterwards?
No one is crediting The Intercept for any victim's story, outside of...being willing to cover it. It's not any outlet's story, it's the victim's story.
Gotta push discrediting Tara Reade in the sexual assault thread while pretending not to. LMAO
I'm so fucking done with these assholes.
All i know is everything is up in the air regarding this and i believe Reade. If victims are uncomfortable with the information we know as of now then that is a perfectly valid reason to hold reservations on voting for him.
Because I thought it was important to note the difference between the Reade story and what they did with Ford since in the latter's case they ended up forcing her hand despite her wish to remain anonymous while she decided whether to go public or not. It's a pretty common misconception that they broke the Ford story in some sort of positive way when they didn't, and I thought that was relevant to the topic of how sexual assault victims are treated during this sort of process.
They were the ones to get the ball rolling by reporting the letter. I'm not sure why issuing this technicality is important to you instead of, you know, offering support to sexual assault victims who have validly expressed that they've been mistreated on ERA, to the point of being bullied and shamed out of threads.
But at least you were honest in saying you're not interested in the topic. You should have the decency to keep away though.
User banned (2 weeks): Hostility, antagonizing other members, cross-forum drama
Oh. Ohhhhkay.
So you're basically antagonizing everyone by saying that Biden should do X/Y/Z, but when pressed on specifics like what he could do to prove his innocence and what investigations are or could happen, you back down.
Is that not the definition of bad faith posting? Maybe you should just hang out on Gaf 24/7 instead of splitting your time.
How am i antagonizing anyone? I said he should step down while there are investigations ? I'm sorry i don't have the answers for everything?
This is not happening. Disgusting, just stop.
We really can't just have this one thread without people launching into attacks can we or fucking vigorously defending Biden's honor can we
Unless more evidence has been shown that I'm not aware of, that is not accurate and isn't fair to the case Ford made.
From Vox:
Multiple sworn statements, multiple people who spoke to different press outlets, and notes from therapy sessions all show that Ford was consistent for years. Ignoring the polygraph, that's substantial corroborating evidence. Kavanaugh and his friends also provided corroborating evidence to support Ford's account, albeit unintentionally (see this Twitter thread by Seth Abramson, which also mentions multiple other pieces of corroborating evidence from Ford and others who knew Kavanaugh).
For fuck sake.
What a fucking trash heap Era has become that we're at a point where we've got people telling victims to 'go back to Gaf', knowing exactly why this website was created in the first place.
It's important to me because the Intercept publishing that story helped lead to Ford feeling forced to come forward because other media outlets were trying to find her identity. The entire point of Feinstein keeping the letter to herself was that Ford wasn't sure she wanted to come forward and I think/though it was pretty shitty to write an article that could be read to imply she was hiding evidence/doing something nefarious instead. Especially when the ensuing media frenzy led to Ford feeling more or less forced to come forward. While I feel Ford testifying was a good thing for society (it didn't change anything but she deserved to tell her story and it needed to be told), publicly coming forward should have been her choice and not forced by an article in the Intercept.
Here's how the situation was described in the Washington Post:
I guess I'm sorry if it's disrupting the normal flow of the topic, but I thought it actually does matter to note that in Ford's case the Intercept contributed to her ill-treatment and was not actually giving her a platform to speak from. It's always really bothered me that Ford was basically forced into going public despite being afraid and it doesn't help that the stuff she's afraid of actually came to pass.
There is a discussion to be had over whether it was the right move to publish the letter, and I always side with victims in the way they want to tell their story and when. Publishing the letter may have been the wrong decision if Ford ultimately did not want The Intercept to do that.
However, contrary to what you said earlier, they did end up supporting her/ultimately giving her a platform by clearly summarizing the events surrounding her testimony, including fully publishing her opening statements and writing basically a dissertation dismantling Kavanaugh and boosting Ford's credibility:
Key Moments in the Senate Testimony of Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh
Highlights from the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, to the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington.
theintercept.com
However, coming into this thread to express you have no interest in the subject of said thread (when it's about supporting victims of sexual assault) is an extremely fucking bad look. You should reflect on that.
She didn't - she made that clear.
However, contrary to what you said earlier, they did end up supporting her/ultimately giving her a platform by clearly summarizing the events surrounding her testimony, including fully publishing her opening statements and writing basically a dissertation picking apart Kavanaugh and boosting Ford's credibility:
They may have not made the right move in originally publishing her letter, but I think it's clear they had good intentions and did an enormous amount of work in getting Ford's story published.Key Moments in the Senate Testimony of Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh
Highlights from the testimony of Brett Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, to the Senate Judiciary Committee in Washington.
But my point was they stepped all over her rights as a victim with their original article. It's great that they - among others - provided her a platform later on but publishing a piece that led to her unwilling outing is bad on the face of it and worse when her concerns about her safety and her family's safety were leading her to not want to come forward (well and she also seems to have felt it was getting too late to matter)
I've literally explained that I wanted to clarify the Ford stuff because it was actually an instance where the victim was not treated right and suffered the consequences because of it. The person I was correcting even thanked me for clarifying what had happened, which I'm grateful for because I don't think everyone realizes what happened to her during that time period.
The treatement of sexual assault victims should be what's being discussed but my (sarcastic) point in my first post was that this thread has instead basically been almost entirely about shitting on each other on a personal and/or political level
In fairness, Pixieking didn't say "Go back to Gaf," they said "Stop splitting your time between Gaf and Era," with the implication being that the person they quoted still goes to Gaf despite knowing why Era broke off from it... and, well, it doesn't look like they were wrong about that implication.
I don't remember her specifically saying that she wasn't happy that they published the letter, and if she did, then I side with her completely. It's been a while.
But I also wanted to state that I think it's clear The Intercept has good intentions and that they weren't just trying to push the story at the expense of Ford for hits, given the attention to detail they've provided and published for both Ford and Reade.
You do realize that coming into a thread like this and saying you're not interested in the topic is partly why this it exists in the first place? Maybe not try to double down and just accept that it was insensitive, and quite frankly, a shitty thing to say.
I'm sorry guys i know i shouldn't have argued with them and just let it go, but seeing it on this thread was too much :(
I think i'm just going to stick to the gaming side or the very least avoid anything political for awhile until all of this settles. This is just too much for me.
Last edited:
so I kinda figured that other thread was a shitshow, but I just decided to make myself miserable and read the last 2 pages of the Bernie irresponsibility thread, and sigh............
honestly I don't know if I should be angry at this site, or angry at myself for exposing myself to garbage, and causing my blood to boil. I'm not even a victim of sexual assault and this just pisses me off to no end. Can't imagine how it makes victims feel.
honestly I don't know if I should be angry at this site, or angry at myself for exposing myself to garbage, and causing my blood to boil. I'm not even a victim of sexual assault and this just pisses me off to no end. Can't imagine how it makes victims feel.
who gives a fuck if he splits his time there? Why enter the thread to start drama? Don't act like we don't know what Pixieking was doing by saying that
It's in that WaPo article I linked/quoted from. It's not just the letter of course, but that the letter led to more details about her and eventually reporters ambushing her after work and what not, at which point it was clear her identity was blown" and she was going to be a public figure whether she wanted to be or not.
I'm not sure if good, but yeah I think the intent was "There's something wonky here/there's a story" and they were over-zealous about pushing it without thinking through the potential consequences, particularly as to why Feinstein might be holding the letter back . Feinstein's spokesperson didn't comment for the story, which doesn't help, but since they knew it was about some sort of misconduct involving a girl/woman, I wish they had been a bit more circumspect. Especially since their own article kind of points in the direction of the truth:
If you have that general outline you should realize the likelihood that it's the woman, not Feinstein, driving the privacy/"secrecy". Unfortunately they missed that, whatever the reason.
I agree that it ended up being bad idea to use sarcasm, but the only thing I doubled down on was why I felt it was important to get the details of Professor Ford's story. And - sarcasm or not - people took a post outlining how a sexual assault victim was mistreated and were claiming I was trying to undermine Reade with it, called me an asshole for posting about Ford and largely ignored the point I was trying to make about how Ford was forced into a role she seems to have been moving away from. Hopefully if this general topic is raised again (maybe away from the pressures of an election) it'll be a more constructive thread I guess.
Compromising the agency of victims is not ever cool even if it wasn't intended that way. It was a controversial call and it doesn't sound like they made the right decision. However, I still appreciate their dedication to trying to do the right thing and providing a voice for both Ford and Reade throughout their time in public.
Maybe people are rightfully angry, that in a thread about supporting sexual assault victims, someone comes into said thread and declares they're not interested?
And unless you've not been on ERA in the last 3 weeks, it's very clear why people would be set off. I don't blame them one bit for lashing out at that sentence.
Because people have even come into this very thread to harass and attack victims of abuse, again siding with the powerful and protected.
It really is so fucking depressing. In my own experience, there's literally no left leaning space left on the internet that isn't trying to bury the Reade story while dogpiling anyone who dares bring it up smearing them and/or Reade as a Russian plant, and is now mercilessly browbeating anyone who has reservations about voting for Biden given his history and accusations. I thought that Era might be the one place that would actually police this shit given the reason why it was made, but of course not. This whole affair has completely disillusioned a life long democrat like myself and left me deeply cynical toward my supposed party. They threw away assault survivors the second it was no longer politically convenient to have us around.
I say this as someone who is not a sexual assault victim FWIW, but I don't understand in that other thread why people can't simply be empathetic that maybe, just maybe, people have trauma or other issues that make them extremely uncomfortable voting for Biden and that others should accept that rather than sit there and browbeat them about how "priveleged" they are or calling them a Trump supporter or some shit.
This really doesn't have to be that hard. The strawman arguments over there of people claiming that some people are saying "Supporting Biden should be bannable." is some incredible mental gymnastics. I didn't see any posts over there (or even in this thread) that claimed supporting Biden should be bannable.
Why is it that hard to accept the fact that rape victims don't want to vote for a rapist?
This really doesn't have to be that hard. The strawman arguments over there of people claiming that some people are saying "Supporting Biden should be bannable." is some incredible mental gymnastics. I didn't see any posts over there (or even in this thread) that claimed supporting Biden should be bannable.
Why is it that hard to accept the fact that rape victims don't want to vote for a rapist?
The shaming going around and the general behavior is kind of making me not want to vote to be honest.
- Status