Do you think that Donald Trump is just as guilty of sexual harassment and/or sexual assault as Harvey Weinstein, or Kevin Spacey, or Bill Cosby, or Andy Dick, or Michael Jackson?
Asked by
Kardamom (
33494
)
November 4th, 2017
They have all been accused. There has been lots of information, evidence, and people coming forward. Why would you consider some of them guilty, but not all of them?
My own own personal opinion is that all of them are guilty. You don’t get boat loads of people coming forward for no reason. All of this info has been around for years, it’s not like anyone is making money from this (not the accusers, at least).
All of us know someone, or multiple people who have been sexually harrassed, sexually assaulted, or raped. Most of those people had a hard time coming forward to let us know what happened to them because they felt like somehow it was their fault that they were violated, or that they were not going to be believed, or that they told their stories and they actually were not believed, or that they were ashamed or scared, even though what happened to them was not their fault.
We tend to believe those people who are close to us who have told us their stories. Their stories are sad and sickening. Why is it so hard to believe other people who have had the same experiences, just because the abuser was someone who was “famous” or who shares our political affiliation? Why is it so hard to believe that someone we admire as a “celebrity” is incapable of such atrocities? And why would you stick by them, even after the evidence is so overwhelming?
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
14 Answers
On camera Trump bragged about assaulting women.
At least (and I mean the most infinitesimal least) the others acknowledge that assault and rape are bad, either by denying the allegations or apologizing.
Coming from a victim who knows what it feels like to not have others believe your claims, yes.
“I just start kissing them, It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.” These are Trump’s own words and women have come forward with specific accusations.
Judging others depravity is difficult.
The worst would have to be Michael Jackson, since he was doing this with kids.
Kevin Spacey would be next, since he was trying to seduce a 14 year old.
Bill Cosby would be next, since he was drugging and raping women.
Donald Trump and Harvey Weinstein would be next. At least the women were conscious while being pressured for sex.
I don’t know what Andy Dick did, and I really don’t care to hear it. I assume it was awful, because it involves Andy Dick.
Cosby was drugging the women if I remember correctly. That is in a class by itself in my opinion.
Do I think Trump sexually harassed women? Yup. Do I think all harassment is equal? I don’t. None is ok, but it’s not all equal. I think Bill Clinton harassed women, and probably we can put John Kennedy in there. Maybe a few other presidents.
You aren’t dealing with rational people. Their world view is shaped by right wing talking points. A rational person would never have voted for a dirt bag like Trump in the first place.
Kennedy was a dirt bag as well, prpbably Bill too.. But at least they had sense enough not to broad cast what they did. And in JFKs times things like that rarely came to public attention. Trump is brazen about it, like a damn high school jock.
If you believe the worst of Bill Clinton’s accusers (and they seem believable), Bubba would expose himself to women, and if they rejected him, he would grin and say “No problem!”
JFK was a womanizer, but as far as I know, the women were willing participants.
They hardly seem to fit with this crowd.
YES. He was stupid enough to talk about it publicly, too.
@Kardamom “My own own personal opinion is that all of them are guilty. You don’t get boat loads of people coming forward for no reason. All of this info has been around for years, it’s not like anyone is making money from this (not the accusers, at least).”
Not entirely true. In Michael Jackson’s case, at least, the family settled a civil suit for more than $20,000,000, despite the fact that their claims were not corroborated in a court of law and the grand jury never found sufficient evidence to indict Jackson. The boy in the case (who later sued for legal emancipation from his parents), years later, stated that his father was abusive and his parents forced him to make accusations against Jackson.
And the 2003–04 criminal case against him depended pretty much entirely on the testimony of witness who all had credibility problems (including one former employee of Jackson’s who had been convicted of stealing property from him), another witness who was paid half a million by a tabloid to claim that he saw Jackson fondle Macaulay Culkin (which Culkin denied ever happened), and a mother who’s testimony was rambling and incoherent.
As far as facts go, no. To my knowledge, Trump’s sexual harassment past is mostly innuendo. The others mentioned have hard cases, and evidence.
It wouldn’t surprise me, but I think everyone deserves to be considered innocent of being a rapist, if there is no evidence.
As far as Trump’s wife feeling uneasy during sex with him, duh… I have ZERO sympathy, for a woman who prostitutes herself to a wealthy man. I’m sure sex with a nasty old man is not enjoyable.
Michael Jackson was a Pedophile no matter how much he protested against it. You don’t let kids (who are not your own children) sleep in your bed! I don’t believe for one second that he slept on the floor, either. There are many other kids (not ones who were in it for monetary reasons, nor their parents) who have said that Michael Jackson did, in fact, sexually molest them. He preyed upon vulnerable children. He was not found guilty, because he was a huge celebrity, in the most enormous sense. There was no way that they were going to be able to assemble a jury of his peers, because he had none. He had fans. That’s who was on the jury.
Sure. The prosecution relied upon witnesses who were proven to be lying, had no real corroborating evidence, and even ended up treating its own primary witness as hostile, but clearly the only reason Jackson was found not guilty was because the jury was packed with his fans.
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
