To my simplistic way of thinking, there is no difference in Donald
Trump, Bill Cosby, Wilt Chamberlain, or Bill Clinton, just to begin a
list of sexual predators. During my years working in state government
and being active in the Organized Blind Movement, I have watched over
and over again, mostly men using their position to bed women. They
mostly thought of this control as part of the privilege of power.
They did not "have their way" with countless women because they cared
for each individual...although they most assuredly said so, but it was
a show of strength, the manly exhibition which said, "See how great I
am!".
I must admit that charges against Bill Cosby did come as a total
surprise. In part, I had bought the TV image as the real man. Many
prestigious men spend their leisure hours moving from bed room to bed
room without looking the part. But even without seeing him, Donald
Trump brought in me a sense of a womanizer of the first order.
Maybe it was because in the back of his voice I could hear my sister's
first husband.
Carl Jarvis
On 10/9/16, Miriam Vieni <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hamblin writes: "The Republican presidential nominee has been caught on
tape
referring to grabbing women, positing that 'you can do anything' when
you're
'a star.'"
Donald Trump. (photo: Jeffrey Phelps/AP)
Trump's Words Are Not 'Explicit Sex Talk.' They Describe Assault.
By James Hamblin, The Atlantic
08 October 16
Concern isn't about being "lewd" or "graphic," but about being
misogynistic,
coercive, abusive, and dehumanizing.
The Republican presidential nominee has been caught on tape referring to
grabbing women, positing that "you can do anything" when you're "a star."
Some news outlets reported this as a problem of sexually descriptive words,
such as "Donald Trump's Graphic Sex Talk Audio Leaked" and "Stars React
After Graphic Donald Trump and Billy Bush Convo Leaks." Even The Washington
Post-which broke the story-used the headline "Trump Recorded Having
Extremely Lewd Conversation About Women in 2005."
The thing about the Republican's words isn't that they're explicit or
graphic. It's that they're misogynistic, coercive, abusive, and
dehumanizing. And as my colleague David Graham notes, illegal: The
candidate
is describing forcing himself on women, bragging that they're disinclined
to
object because of a power structure on which he knowingly capitalizes.
Framing this as lewd, even extremely so, is a reminder of the frequent
reluctance to name sexual assault. Explicit conversations are a different
thing, a part of life central to mature sexuality. If Trump, Clinton, or
any
other candidate or human hadn't had explicit, graphic, lewd conversations,
that would be concerning. Trump's comments are something else.
By comparison, there would be no issue with a recording in which Trump
talked about his "veiny member" and how he enjoys "thrusting to and fro
until climax." (Sorry, just making the point.) At this point I'd welcome a
leaked tape in which he recounted the best sex he ever had, on a giant
yacht. How it was so fantastic, and how many orgasms everyone had, and how
no one cried, and he felt like God was moving through him, but it was just
semen, huge amounts of amazing semen. How he sometimes weeps when he thinks
about women masturbating, because human bodies instill in him a profound
sense of awe. And awe isn't easy to come by these days, let me tell you.
Explicit conversation is a bonding ritual that's not bad or shameful.
Treating it as such makes people misunderstand what explicit conversation
is
supposed to be-as Trump claimed when he excused his comments as "locker
room
banter." To take him at his word, he misunderstands the ritual: Talking
explicitly about sex is different from bragging about forcing yourself on
people.
Any notion to the contrary is a product of not talking about sex frankly,
openly, often enough. And then when you do, feeling like you have to brag
about grabbing women "by the pussy" on a bus with Billy Bush, so you end up
perpetuating archaic notions of power and forcible objectification. Because
that's what you heard someone else do. That's what the boys at the New York
Military Academy did during Trump's formative years.
Like Trump, ever more Americans seem to feel that masculinity (as they
understand it, narrowly defined) is threatened. It's threatened
specifically
by "PC culture," often used as a sweeping indictment of any attempt at
decency. My colleague Molly Ball spoke to some of these men recently at a
Trump rally in Pennsylvania, men with chin-strap beards and novelty
t-shirts
calling Hillary Clinton a bitch because "it's funny."
Confusing humor and cruelty is born of profound ignorance, and an idea that
violating codes is inherently funny. Counteract this confusion by talking
about sex more openly, not less. Show that decency need not be puritanical.
Chastise coercion but embrace consensual boning down. (And avoid saying
"boning down" until you've got a good read on the room.) Because in their
ignorance, toxic men are malleable. Their notions of masculinity will
change
with the culture that shapes them. This starts with the words that,
seemingly small, frame these discussions about sex and power, respect and
abuse, what's lewd and what's baldly inhumane.
Error! Hyperlink reference not valid. Error! Hyperlink reference not
valid.
Donald Trump. (photo: Jeffrey Phelps/AP)
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/10/this-is-not-explicit-sex-t
alk/503459/?utm_source=atlfbhttp://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/1
0/this-is-not-explicit-sex-talk/503459/?utm_source=atlfb
Trump's Words Are Not 'Explicit Sex Talk.' They Describe Assault.
By James Hamblin, The Atlantic
08 October 16
Concern isn't about being "lewd" or "graphic," but about being
misogynistic,
coercive, abusive, and dehumanizing.
he Republican presidential nominee has been caught on tape referring to
grabbing women, positing that "you can do anything" when you're "a star."
Some news outlets reported this as a problem of sexually descriptive words,
such as "Donald Trump's Graphic Sex Talk Audio Leaked" and "Stars React
After Graphic Donald Trump and Billy Bush Convo Leaks." Even The Washington
Post-which broke the story-used the headline "Trump Recorded Having
Extremely Lewd Conversation About Women in 2005."
The thing about the Republican's words isn't that they're explicit or
graphic. It's that they're misogynistic, coercive, abusive, and
dehumanizing. And as my colleague David Graham notes, illegal: The
candidate
is describing forcing himself on women, bragging that they're disinclined
to
object because of a power structure on which he knowingly capitalizes.
Framing this as lewd, even extremely so, is a reminder of the frequent
reluctance to name sexual assault. Explicit conversations are a different
thing, a part of life central to mature sexuality. If Trump, Clinton, or
any
other candidate or human hadn't had explicit, graphic, lewd conversations,
that would be concerning. Trump's comments are something else.
By comparison, there would be no issue with a recording in which Trump
talked about his "veiny member" and how he enjoys "thrusting to and fro
until climax." (Sorry, just making the point.) At this point I'd welcome a
leaked tape in which he recounted the best sex he ever had, on a giant
yacht. How it was so fantastic, and how many orgasms everyone had, and how
no one cried, and he felt like God was moving through him, but it was just
semen, huge amounts of amazing semen. How he sometimes weeps when he thinks
about women masturbating, because human bodies instill in him a profound
sense of awe. And awe isn't easy to come by these days, let me tell you.
Explicit conversation is a bonding ritual that's not bad or shameful.
Treating it as such makes people misunderstand what explicit conversation
is
supposed to be-as Trump claimed when he excused his comments as "locker
room
banter." To take him at his word, he misunderstands the ritual: Talking
explicitly about sex is different from bragging about forcing yourself on
people.
Any notion to the contrary is a product of not talking about sex frankly,
openly, often enough. And then when you do, feeling like you have to brag
about grabbing women "by the pussy" on a bus with Billy Bush, so you end up
perpetuating archaic notions of power and forcible objectification. Because
that's what you heard someone else do. That's what the boys at the New York
Military Academy did during Trump's formative years.
Like Trump, ever more Americans seem to feel that masculinity (as they
understand it, narrowly defined) is threatened. It's threatened
specifically
by "PC culture," often used as a sweeping indictment of any attempt at
decency. My colleague Molly Ball spoke to some of these men recently at a
Trump rally in Pennsylvania, men with chin-strap beards and novelty
t-shirts
calling Hillary Clinton a bitch because "it's funny."
Confusing humor and cruelty is born of profound ignorance, and an idea that
violating codes is inherently funny. Counteract this confusion by talking
about sex more openly, not less. Show that decency need not be puritanical.
Chastise coercion but embrace consensual boning down. (And avoid saying
"boning down" until you've got a good read on the room.) Because in their
ignorance, toxic men are malleable. Their notions of masculinity will
change
with the culture that shapes them. This starts with the words that,
seemingly small, frame these discussions about sex and power, respect and
abuse, what's lewd and what's baldly inhumane.
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
http://e-max.it/posizionamento-siti-web/socialize
