The Kavanaugh controversy

[Frelga]

Griffy drops the mic, as usual.

But how can we make that very important cultural change, without also blindly throwing out the very important principle of innocence until guilt is proven?

In the context of a criminal trial? Same way as usual, by weighing the evidence. One piece of data is that most reports of sexual assault are genuine, but all evidence in the specific case should be considered.

This is not a trial. The question is not should Kavanaugh go to prison for attempted rape. The question is, is he the best possible choice for a lifetime position of immense power over American lives. Based on yesterday's performance, I would say he isn't.

Say he's innocent of assaulting Dr. Ford. He could have asserted his innocence with dignity. He could have shown compassion for the terrible experience that Dr. Ford had gone through. He could have at least tried to look as impartial and apolitical as a judge is supposed to be. Instead, he behaved exactly as privileged men do when they don't get something they want. As if the seat on the highest court was somehow his due instead of a humbling honor.

And let's keep in mind that up until yesterday, the worst fate he had to dread was keeping his current lifetime appointment. That may still be true in a week. OTOH, the FBI may not be able to determine if he assaulted Dr. Ford, but they might be able to say if he told the truth under oath about other things.

This should not be about a partisan divide. Surely it is possible to find a conservative judge who does not have a history of blackout drinking, contemptible behavior against women, and mysterious debts. The divide here is whether you believe that affluent white men should be accorded privileges no one else is, at the expense of everyone else.

Come to think, that is the party line divide.

[Cenedril_Gildinaur]

In a way, though, it is a case of "believe all women" because Senators who doubted Ford are accused of not believing any women. I consider that claim absurd. Somehow I think those making the claim don't think it is absurd.

I looked on my Facebook feed and some progressives are posting about how teenage girls are logging into Facebook and being told they don't matter anymore and that if they are abused it doesn't matter. All because some people don't believe Ford.

[Primula Baggins]

Did you watch Ford’s testimony, C-G?

[Cerin]

In a way, though, it is a case of "believe all women" because Senators who doubted Ford are accused of not believing any women. I consider that claim absurd. Somehow I think those making the claim don't think it is absurd.

I looked on my Facebook feed and some progressives are posting about how teenage girls are logging into Facebook and being told they don't matter anymore and that if they are abused it doesn't matter. All because some people don't believe Ford.

This was clearly illustrated in the confrontation with Sen. Flake. The woman said that his decision to vote for Kavanaugh (so, his unwillingness to condemn without substantiating evidence even while hearing Ford and acknowledging the seriousness of her experience) was saying that her own assault didn't matter. There is a striking absence of thought process in this meme, which is what I so detest about all social media stampedes.

[Faramond]

Frelga, I don't think ending the conversation was Griff's intent. Isn't that what a mic drop essentially is?

[Griffon64]

Guys.

"Dropping the mic" implies that the conversation is over, and that's literally the last thing I would like.

There's a lot of conversation to be had around this topic, a lot of misunderstanding and assumption flying around, a lot of anger.

That stuff's gonna keep festering and begetting bad stuff if it isn't aired out.

If we're going to advocate for giving the silenced a voice, it is wrong to go around saying voices we disagree with should be silenced in return. Really.

I think that "believe women" is getting misunderstood by a lot of people. That's understandable, it is a shorthand for a whole different worldview and perspective on life, and people who don't already have all that stuff loaded into their life will easily misinterpret what it means.

To give an example of how easy it is to misinterpret things: any moment now somebody's going to notice the pattern of men who push back against people saying: "Hey, maybe we should listen to women in the same manner as we listen to men?" with "Oh, so you want to tear down the system of law we have?" Someone who doesn't engage those guys and then learn that they misunderstood "believe women" to mean "believe women over men, in a court of law, throw out any evidence" will think they mean "But the system is meant to suppress women and their voices, so if we start listening to women, we will be tearing down the system."

And that's obviously not what is meant, same as it is obviously not meant to believe women over evidence. Faramond, for example, explained "believe women" in an earlier post when he wrote "listen to accusers, believe the evidence".

ETA: cross-posted with Faramond. What he said.

[Frelga]

Frelga, I don't think ending the conversation was Griff's intent. Isn't that what a mic drop essentially is?

Yeah, but it's not like anything short of a nuclear blast could make us all shut up, even if the essentials have been covered.

[yovargas]

('mic drop' doesn't really mean ending the conversation. It's more like a "that was badass" punctuation mark.)

That was a phenomenal post, Griffy. Really, truly it was. But I don't think addresses the big, lingering issue that is getting left out of a lot of these conversations: we are being called as a culture to finally listen, respectfully, thoughtfully, sympathetically, to the stories of these victims - but then what? Those who come forward with these stories don't simply want to be heard, they want consequences of some sort for those they are accusing. What should be the cultural consequences (I emphasize cultural as opposed to legal consequences, which we surely all agree wouldn't come into play in these kinds of situations) of being accused of doing something terrible that we have no way of proving? Right now, it seems like we are divided between two answers - either no consequences at all, or having ones life and reputation totally and completely ruined forever. Those are our two options, apparently. Neither of them strike me as good ones.

[yovargas]

He could have shown compassion for the terrible experience that Dr. Ford had gone through.

Reading through his long opening statement yesterday, I would say that he showed a remarkable level of compassion for Ford and for women in general, while still strongly denying his involvement. That is a tough thing to do and I think he did it remarkably well.

[Griffon64]

we are being called as a culture to finally listen, respectfully, thoughtfully, sympathetically, to the stories of these victims - but then what? Those who come forward with these stories don't simply want to be heard, they want consequences of some sort for those they are accusing. What should be the cultural consequences (I emphasize cultural as opposed to legal consequences, which we surely all agree wouldn't come into play in these kinds of situations) of being accused of doing something terrible that we have no way of proving? Right now, it seems like we are divided between two answers - either no consequences at all, or having ones life and reputation totally and completely ruined forever. Those are our two options, apparently. Neither of them strike me as good ones.

I have no idea. That is outside my ability to speak to with any kind of authority, so I will do what I do when I don't know, and simply try to listen attentively, widely, and without prejudice to what actual victims and actual abusers have to say.

I do think the cultural impact of simply listening will already be a seismic shift, and it is way too soon to start thinking about what should happen next.

If I had to hazard a guess, I'd say that a greater awareness among young men and women going through the teenage and college years, and a greater respect for women among that age group, as well as an increased scrutiny of those who hold power ( be they football coaches, priests, corner office occupants, teachers, what have you ) will already be a great leap forward. I hope that that is happening. I hope that this cycle stops.

The problem with these decades-old accusations ( truths in many cases, but let's stick with calling them accusations ) is indeed that the evidence will be almost impossible to find. Where can you really go from here? Maybe this is one of those things were the cultural impact is simply "Never again" going forward. I hope that law enforcement start to take abuse accusations more seriously. I hope the estimated quarter million or so rape kits sitting untested across the country finally gets tested. I hope that young boys and girls abused by power figures they trusted are believed and not shut up in the name of pretenses, power, or "winning".

I realize that doesn't answer the question for what happens to the individuals involved in the current series of decade-old allegations coming out. The answer to that question from me is, I don't know. I think there is a deep value to simply being acknowledged and finally treated with respect and dignity, and I suspect many victims coming forward will feel the weight lifted from them at finally getting to speak out and be heard and believed.

If you read the stories these victims tell ( I have read many over the past months ) you'll see that relief at finally telling their stories to an audience willing to listen is a common factor. And so, often, is the hope that the abuser may recognize himself ( or herself ) in the story and reach out to apologize, allowing the wound to close. The victims are often just looking to have their pain acknowledged.

Would that be enough in all cases? Almost certainly not, but we're dealing with years of brokenness. Dismissing the possibility of healing for some because we go searching for some ideal or some perceived perfection won't help either.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

He could have shown compassion for the terrible experience that Dr. Ford had gone through.

Reading through his long opening statement yesterday, I would say that he showed a remarkable level of compassion for Ford and for women in general, while still strongly denying his involvement. That is a tough thing to do and I think he did it remarkably well.

Watching and listening, I did not at all feel that it came across that way at all. None of the woman I have spoken, including some Republican, felt that it came across that way.

42723522_10214937849372414_2306637801501753344_n.jpg (55.13 KiB) Viewed 4127 times

Judging from the expressions on their faces, I don't think any of the women in this picture felt that way either.

[Cerin]

Those women are his family and friends. I would say their expressions reflect the anguish they are sharing with him in that moment, as he speaks about his ruined reputation, the grief his family has gone through, and the viciousness of the left's attacks on him.

[yovargas]

And I would say that trying to interpret people's expressions from a random freeze frame is totally pointless and meaningless.

[elengil]

Those women are his family and friends. I would say their expressions reflect the anguish they are sharing with him in that moment, as he speaks about his ruined reputation, the grief his family has gone through, and the viciousness of the left's attacks on him.

It isn't "the left" attacking him. Any more than it's "the right" enabling sexual assault.

But let's discuss this. Do we really believe that EVERY republican senator thinks that the allegation is entirely baseless and pure politics? Does EVERY democratic senator believe that the allegation is rock solid and Kavanaugh is likely an uncaught sexual predator?

Do we REALLY believe this? Every single one believes what just happens to align with their party? Earnestly believes it?

I sure don't.

So what are our options when it comes to our senators? Some republicans think it's likely to be true, but don't care? Some democrats feel it's likely to be untrue, but are playing politics? Some republicans think it's just democrats throwing a tantrum? Some democrats thinking that republicans have played so dirty this is justified?

What do we really think our senators think in this situation?

Because this is what I see: We had a Republican-imposed deadline to finish this. Yes, they want to get it done before November. That is understandable, but not really justifiable. Just because you want to get something done doesn't justify pushing it through despite several issues - even before these allegations, such as the inability to access a considerable percentage of documents, and then not allowing them to go public. Utterly unprecedented. The American people do deserve to 'see' who is being put on the court.

If you want to claim holding the allegation until the 'last minute' was dirty, what about holding a letter with 65 signatures which 'exonerate' him held util the very next morning? Do you really think they didn't already have that letter? If they did, what prompted them getting a letter with 65 women assuring the senate that Mr Kavanaugh was not a sexual predator prior to any allegation of wrong doing? Was it really prior to ANY allegation? Or only prior to public allegations?

When women say this process tells sexual assault survivors they don't matter, it isn't so much that they didn't have a hearing and listen to Ford, it's the politics of the matter.

We have at this point multiple public allegations. Multiple possible witnesses to speak with. Multiple calls for investigation. We got one hearing with one person. One. No other accusers. No other witnesses. I do not believe this was a good-faith effort on behalf of Republicans to get to the truth. I do not believe they wanted witnesses, as has been stated in this thread, because they did not call them. They didn't talk to any other woman who accused him. Despite having ample names they could have spoken with.

It took one Republican to essentially 'break ranks' to finally force an FBI investigation. Something 'the left' had been asking for for some time. Something even the ABA ended up asking for. Is the ABA part of a vicious leftist conspiracy? Is the right not willing to find the truth? Why is this always coming down along party lines? Do you really not understand why women are saying this is a horrible message being sent to survivors?

In the real world, I expect a good deal of both sides to take both positions, because that is reality. Some Republicans MUST believe her, but choose not to care. Some Democrats MUST believe him, but choose not to care. This is a terrifying thought for both sides of this. Why do we allow our elected officials to be so GD partisan at the expense of the truth?

Believing Ford, as a citizen, is not about partisanship. It's about having listened to both sides, watching this unfold, and finding her far more credible, not just because of what she said, but because Kavanaugh has lied over and over about so many stupid petty things, that how can I possibly believe it when he says he didn't do this?

Devil's Triangle? A quarters game? Give me a break. Boofed, Ralph Club, Renate Alumnus... not one single explanation was believable. If he had just come clean on all of these things then I would be far more likely to believe he was innocent. He was a stupid teenager, trying to look cool to his friends, and this is what stupid teenagers do and boast about. It doesn't mean it happened, it means we were teenage boys. That is believable. But Little Mr. Choir Boy I never drank until I passed out, if I threw up it was cause I have a weak stomach, and yeah, that girl was just a really good friend we danced with? I don't buy any of that for one second.

I really don't see how most rational people can think that those explanations were believable, and thus anything else he said must be taken at face value. I don't see that as partisanship, I see that as critical thinking. If you tell me that makes me part of the vicious attack of the left, then I'll stand on that square. If you insist that he's innocent, then what makes you sure you aren't the one being a blind partisan?

[yovargas]

In the real world, I expect a good deal of both sides to take both positions, because that is reality. Some Republicans MUST believe her, but choose not to care. Some Democrats MUST believe him, but choose not to care. This is a terrifying thought for both sides of this. Why do we allow our elected officials to be so GD partisan at the expense of the truth?

Because the core people voting for those senators care more about partisan victories than the truth.

I feel like party loyalty is the poison ruining nearly everything I see in politics today.

[Frelga]

If those women were meant to look anguished yet supportive, they amazingly failed. The reason the photo went viral is because those are all clearly "dafuq man" faces. If I were there to support that guy, it would be the face I'd make when I realized what a horrible job he was doing.

The only one doing it remotely right is Zina Bash on the right, per Phil Platt, "a GOP legal operative, infamous for supposedly flashing the “white power symbol”, twice, in a hearing for Kavanaugh."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/ ... sband-says

[Cerin]

It isn't "the left" attacking him.

Yes, it is the left attacking him. He quoted several over the top statements that had been made about him by other Senators, among them, that he was evil and that his appointment would cause millions of deaths. I call that a vicious attack.

But let's discuss this. Do we really believe that EVERY republican senator thinks that the allegation is entirely baseless and pure politics? Does EVERY democratic senator believe that the allegation is rock solid and Kavanaugh is likely an uncaught sexual predator?
Do we REALLY believe this? Every single one believes what just happens to align with their party? Earnestly believes it?
I sure don't.
So what are our options when it comes to our senators? Some republicans think it's likely to be true, but don't care? Some democrats feel it's likely to be untrue, but are playing politics? Some republicans think it's just democrats throwing a tantrum? Some democrats thinking that republicans have played so dirty this is justified?
What do we really think our senators think in this situation?
Because this is what I see: We had a Republican-imposed deadline to finish this. Yes, they want to get it done before November. That is understandable, but not really justifiable. Just because you want to get something done doesn't justify pushing it through despite several issues - even before these allegations, such as the inability to access a considerable percentage of documents, and then not allowing them to go public. Utterly unprecedented. The American people do deserve to 'see' who is being put on the court.
If you want to claim holding the allegation until the 'last minute' was dirty, what about holding a letter with 65 signatures which 'exonerate' him held util the very next morning? Do you really think they didn't already have that letter? If they did, what prompted them getting a letter with 65 women assuring the senate that Mr Kavanaugh was not a sexual predator prior to any allegation of wrong doing? Was it really prior to ANY allegation? Or only prior to public allegations?
When women say this process tells sexual assault survivors they don't matter, it isn't so much that they didn't have a hearing and listen to Ford, it's the politics of the matter.
We have at this point multiple public allegations. Multiple possible witnesses to speak with. Multiple calls for investigation. We got one hearing with one person. One. No other accusers. No other witnesses. I do not believe this was a good-faith effort on behalf of Republicans to get to the truth. I do not believe they wanted witnesses, as has been stated in this thread, because they did not call them. They didn't talk to any other woman who accused him. Despite having ample names they could have spoken with.
It took one Republican to essentially 'break ranks' to finally force an FBI investigation. Something 'the left' had been asking for for some time.

Yes, it's politics. The highest stakes politics imaginable. The realization of a decades-long dream and effort to conservatize the judiciary at every level. It is strategy for the Democrats and for the Republicans. The Democrats have used Ford as a pawn to try and hold the seat open until after the election, in the hopes they will have more power then, to affect the choice, and the Republicans are trying to steamroll anything that gets in the way of their realizing their dream. Everyone is playing hard ball politics here.

In the real world, I expect a good deal of both sides to take both positions, because that is reality.

Is it? How many of the Democrats here at HoF are believing Kavanaugh?

I really don't see how most rational people can think that those explanations were believable, and thus anything else he said must be taken at face value. I don't see that as partisanship, I see that as critical thinking.

And here's the root of the bitter partisanship that has taken over the country. You are not content to have your opinion, but declare that most rational people must share it, and if they don't, they aren't thinking properly.

If you tell me that makes me part of the vicious attack of the left, then I'll stand on that square. If you insist that he's innocent, then what makes you sure you aren't the one being a blind partisan?

The only thing I'm insisting on is that a man not be condemned without evidence. There is no way to know who is telling the truth here, and so the accusation shouldn't be factored in to a Senator's vote, imo. They should make their decision based on facts. They will probably make their decision based on party. If I were voting, I would reject the nomination because Kavanaugh has too strong an ideological bent and I believe he will sit on the court with an agenda.

If those women were meant to look anguished yet supportive, they amazingly failed.

Could it be they weren't 'meant' to look any way, but are simply people there suffering in the moment with someone they love?

[elengil]

Everyone is playing hard ball politics here.

Yes. That does not translate to a vicious attack by the left, as I said, any more than it translates to the right enabling sexual assault. But it DOES very heavily point to a very, very broken system of government.

Is it? How many of the Democrats here at HoF are believing Kavanaugh?

I don't know, how many here are Democrats? But I was referring to the Senate, not the country.

You are not content to have your opinion, but declare that most rational people must share it, and if they don't, they aren't thinking properly.

That was about one single aspect - the farcical explanations for his yearbook entries.

The only thing I'm insisting on is that a man not be condemned without evidence.

And no one has condemned him. We asked for an FBI investigation, not a criminal trial.

[Cerin]

And no one has condemned him. We asked for an FBI investigation, not a criminal trial.

In this case, 'condemn' would be to reject the nomination based on an unsubstantiated allegation. And that's what a certain contingent seems to be insisting on, on the rationale that not condemning means their own assault experiences don't matter.

[elengil]

And no one has condemned him. We asked for an FBI investigation, not a criminal trial.

In this case, 'condemn' would be to reject the nomination based on an unsubstantiated allegation. And that's what a certain contingent seems to be insisting on, on the rationale that not condemning means their own assault experiences don't matter.

Certainly some individuals will feel that way in a nation of millions. You will find someone who can take almost any stance, including those who say even if he did it they don't care. But I am trying to limit my discussion to the government, since they are the ones who actually have any say in this matter in any practical sense. No Democratic senators are asking for a criminal trial.