Some of page content & features are available only to members - Sign up only takes 8 seconds!

Should There Be a Statute Of Limitations In Going After Powerful Men Who Indiscreetly Groped Women A Long Time Ago?

+3 votes
56 views
Nov 17 in Politics & Government ✌ by Virginia (4,464 points)

At first I was following all these stories...but lately I wonder if the sexual harassment is becoming something of a witch hunt? At the age of 73, I can vouch that at one time, 'groping' was considered rather a male privilege, and there was no societal outrage at all. President Kennedy got by with it, along with many others. Even at the time, I always considered the loss of my friendship and respect as sufficient consequences for the gropers...

The first time I even recall sexual exploits as a factor was Senator Gary Hart, his extramarital affair with Donna Rice, and he had to withdraw from the US Presidential race 1988. At first he was outraged that news reporters were stalking him over this, he considered it his own personal business and off limits to anyone else - FDR did it, and many others without consequence. 

But now to go back in a powerful man's history for something that happened decades ago? idk...I am certainly not defending those men, I just wonder if there should be more timing of the accusations/exposés to coincide with the change in society standards...maybe 1988 and later?

3 Answers

Rooster Nov 18

I have to agree Virginia. Although it sure isn't right, there should be a statute of limitations on it. Hell, I'd be guilty of it from over 40 years ago. Most women at that time seemed to enjoy it to an extent so it wasn't really a big deal! I can't quite understand why all of these women are stepping forward now, all these years later and making these accusations when they should have done it long ago. It almost seems like a fad nowadays to come out with these things. Yes, it was wrong but sometimes it's just best to let sleeping dogs lie. The ones in Hollywood? That's been going on even longer. I'm afraid this is going to get out of hand and only worsen. I believe the women have the right to come forward but when will this end?

Virginia Rooster Nov 18

Rooster, your experience and your views are very close to my own, here!

TheOtherTink Nov 18

I think one only has to look at the timing of some of these sexual revelations to see that they are politically motivated.  Why, for example, did NBC sit on the Trump "grabbing" tape for 11 years, only to release it a few weeks before the election?  Because NBC suddenly saw the light and became a champion against the sexual abuse of women?  Of course not; they wanted to sink Trump politically.  NBC's motivation was the same as that of Dan Rather at CBS, when he released the phony National Guard memos (aka Rathergate) shortly before the 2004 election in an attempt to sink Bush.

A lib-biased newsman named Rather,

Well-known for his bluster and blather,

Made a dreadful mistake;

The memos were fake.

He's no wiser, but sadder, I gather.

image

Other Tink, I did not even know about the phony National Guard memos; I used to rather enjoy the blather of Rather, now however he has gone down a notch in my (ahem) esteem...cep' in, well, you better stop given them conservatives a free slide, coz they are just as bad as them liverals...

(and I like the jingle VERY much; you and Marianne have talent, that's for sure!)

Oh, I don't give them conservatives a free slide, Virginia (free "slide"? -- ewww:O :blush: :ermm: :) :D)

I believe the allegations against Roy Moore, for example.  But I question why these decades-old misdeeds should surface just weeks before an election.  I also note that liberals tend to be far more hypocritical than conservatives when it comes to protecting their own. Democrats circled the wagons around Bill Clinton in his impeachment hearings and covered for Hillary in her email scandals, although she destroyed much more evidence than Nixon ever did in Watergate, yet he was forced to resign when the Republican leadership refused to support him any further.

Example of liberal hypocrisy: NY Senator Gillibrand (who inherited Hillary's Senate seat) now says Bill Clinton should have resigned, when for many years she accepted Clinton support and never said anything against them.  Even some Democrats are outraged at her chutzpah.  :P

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/11/17/why-kirsten-gillibrands-bold-statement-that-bill-clinton-shouldve-resigned-is-a-big-deal/?utm_term=.afb432b8c77d

O'Tink, I am late getting back to this Q, I think my e-mail may have been 'on-the-blink' for a few days...but my knitting-of-brow for your comment above is the part about liberals doing "it" (i.e., the hypocrisy) more than conservatives?

Most of all, things are in such chaos now that my concern would be that to try and characterize one group broadly is a bit like fiddling when Rome burns! While we are trying to figure out who is worst, the whole lot of 'em is actually so bad the sky is falling! YOU are the one who introduced me to the possibility there is virtually no politician with integrity now, well I seem to have picked up on that idea.

Although I do think the answer lies somehow in we the people using our vote, the politicians are chosen and bought by the lobbying funds...again, I am now worried we may need to be concerned with preventing a descent into violence, rather than trying to figure out which side is worst.

Do you know anything about Patty Murray? She is one of our Washington State senators, and I recall back in the early 1990's when she first ran, her strong suit was a representative of the common folk, a "mom in tennis shoes," she even gave out little keychain tennis shoes - so I am wondering how she is doing.

Hi, Virginia, I don't think you have to knit your brow very much to see that liberals indeed have been the much greater hypocrites, now that we seem to have reached a tipping point with these sexual harassment and other ethics cases.  Liberals for decades have posed as champions of women's rights and were quick to make a big stink when a Republican (e.g.,, Bob Packwood, from your neck of the woods, or Bill O'Reilly) was involved, while ALL THE TIME turning a blind eye to what was common knowledge, as it turns out, about Al Franken or such prominent  liberals as Harvey Weinstein and  Charlie Rose. And Nixon had to resign because 18 minutes of tape was destroyed, but Hillary destroying 30,000 emails with BleachBit on her illegal private server? No problem.

And yes, I think we should use our votes to throw out the scoundrels, and I mean ALL of them, not just the Republicans, but the Democratic poseurs and liars as well.

And as for organized political violence, where is that mostly coming from?  The far left, e.g., BLM and Antifa. Ask Bret Weinstein.

Marianne Nov 19

I am afraid that if all groping offenders would have to be punished, you could expect about 80 % (or more?) of the male population (also men are groped, and there are also female gropers) to be drawn before justice.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-first-impression/201710/will-rape-culture-finally-be-taken-seriously

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/get-hardy/201502/victims-sexual-abuse


But the real damages and the on-going of the spiral of abuse and violence cannot be stopped with punishments, further injustices and cruelty - even after a long time. Additionally, laws exist often since long, but they could/can not be enforced, in too many cases - even today.

Considering the deep rooted mentalities (and education) and distorted beliefs or perceptions, the real damages to mental and physical health and later sequels were rarely noticed (many women were and are considered as property, as a thing and not a person, and if damages were paid, indemnities went to the husband or the male "owner(s)" of the victim's family).

Furthermore, in Western civilisations, flirting manners were not always so gallant like in fairy or knights' tales, and quite a few girls or women would slap, kick or (according to Far West or pioneers' movies) even shoot at too daring offenders.

What was and is, of course, "deplorable" is the systematic abuse of authority and power over depending, weak, defenseless and vulnerable people, namely children, employees (working poor or modern slaves), handicapped, pupils, trainees or students, or even wives (battered women, for instance), etc., bullying and/or sexual harassment.

No, I am not excusing former offenses, but many people will, with increased awareness of social, cultural and medical isues, recognise and learn from their errors, and they will try to make up for their offenses or ignorance, if they are honest and have a conscience. Extremism, hysteria, vendettas, violence and hate campaigns are no solution.

Why do we see the mightiest and wealthiest ones treat other people with so much arrogance and contempt? And how can so many valuable persons be wasted and dumped suddenly like trash after use (and/or abuse)? Because privileged people will, in most cases, get away with it, as mentalities and attitudes did/do not evolve sufficiently. Crooks, narcissists, "sinners", abusers and other "bad elements" are found on every side.


Yes, there were and still are witch hunts, victim shaming, scapegoating and discrimination campaigns, harassment and bullying, and we hear a lot about more or less privileged people with perverse practices or preferences, and also false accusations.


And there are still too many, fed by unhealthy propaganda, prejudice, superstitions and empty promises, who believe that disasters only happen to others.

Raising awareness among the crowds and their leaders might be a first step to find a way towards more sustainable issues and mutual respect.


And even if people realise since a certain time how inappropriate and abusive such offenses are, the great majority is still caught in outdated patterns of principles and values ...


Marianne, I think sexual abuse is only one of many ways in which arrogant powerful people can abuse their subordinates, simply because they can.

Marianne Marianne Nov 20

Yes, of course, T(h)ink; sadly enough, human nature seems, in general, to have problems with "power management", as power or domination - like crushing others or playing the role of a divinity or hero - is addicting.

Many great celebrities seem to have a rather "heavy" past. And too many successes were "earned" through certain shameful episodes or affairs.

After all, the rich and mighty ones and their had (have) often their scapegoats and/or "whipping slaves".

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/morrissey-harvey-weinstein-kevin-spacey-comments-victims-der-spiegel-interview-rape-backlash-a8063476.html


Virginia Marianne Nov 25

Marianne, ty for excellent information; I was especially interested in your observation of the female gropers. I have encountered that only once, when I worked for the Dept. of the Army at Ft. Lewis, Washington State. The women in an office were groping the soldiers! I am guessing they just thought the soldiers were by nature young and coarse, but my friend that got groped, he was not; he was married, and it was difficult and uncomfortable for him to go through that office.

Marianne Marianne Nov 25

Yes, Virginia, that is much less frequent, but it happens too.

Ouch, in an army office?

Related questions

Question followers

0 users followed this question.

28 Online
0 Member And 28 Guest
Today Visits : 3630
Yesterday Visits : 7599
All Visits : 6008756
...