anyone kicked out of family over guns and trump

That has to be one of the most ridiculous posts I’ve ever read on NES.

What a quality rebuttal to what I said, I think that qualifies you to be a CNN contributor!

Yeah.

SO many generalizations.

I voted for him too. I'm happy I did. I want him to win again.

But he's a first-rate pig in his personal life, has been for many decades, and I've got no qualms saying it. I'm certainly not going to go into mental contortions about how "women in our society" are broadly willing to sidle up to any rich man with bad hair, spread their legs, grab the poor, innocent, unwitting rich man's hands, and shove them into their pants.

Just no.

What a great post consisting of an emotion-based non-argument and responses to things I never said!

Really? Ask your wife, or sister, or girlfriend to suppose they were with a rich guy who they didn't know well, but were kind of attracted to, whether they would like it if, without any warning, he just grabbed their privates. What do you think they would say?

Yeah, that post is pretty damn ridiculous.

Two points:

1. Of course they would deny that. People tend to deny things that are embarrassing. What people say and what people do are--get this--sometimes not the same.
2. Do you earnestly believe that what Trump was describing was a literal action? Really? It is clearly a metaphor for him finding it easy to entice whomever he wanted to sleep with him to do so. There is not a pickup artist alive who does what Trump described as a literal way of initiating physical contact with a woman.
 
Really? Ask your wife, or sister, or girlfriend to suppose they were with a rich guy who they didn't know well, but were kind of attracted to, whether they would like it if, without any warning, he just grabbed their privates. What do you think they would say?

Yeah, that post is pretty damn ridiculous.

I don't actually hang out with the sort of gals that would socialize in that realm. I've have encountered some lady's over the years, though, that would be ok with it. However, that wasn't my point. Unwelcome sexual contact isn't cool regardless of how much money is in your checking account.

My point was simply that there's been a lot of, let's just say "strange" posts on this site over the years. It probably wouldn't be too difficult to find some. The thread on that guy's bald subaru tires, can't remember his name but it wasn't Tom. That was kinda odd. There have been others. You know this.

To be clear, I wasn't defending sexual molestation. Just amused at the thought that ANYTHING in this thread even approaches the extremes on this site.
 
What a great post consisting of an emotion-based non-argument and responses to things I never said!

I'm pretty sure you said modern women want rich, powerful men to grab their vaginas without asking. And that it's perfectly hunky-dory for Trump to have done just that.

No? If not, please elaborate.
 
Yeah.

SO many generalizations.

I voted for him too. I'm happy I did. I want him to win again.

But he's a first-rate pig in his personal life, has been for many decades, and I've got no qualms saying it. I'm certainly not going to go into mental contortions about how "women in our society" are broadly willing to sidle up to any rich man with bad hair, spread their legs, grab the poor, innocent, unwitting rich man's hands, and shove them into their pants.

Just no.

Is his commentary tasteless? Sure- but it's definitely worth mentioning that it's not any different than a bunch of sexual convos that men
have in private all over this country, and it doesn't necessarily indicate predatory behavior. I think the audio snippet also lacks a lot of
context. At times during the recording you can't even hear anything. The MSM suggestion is that trump is walking down the street grabbing women that way or something, and that is likely not reality. There are tons of women that consentually thrive off that stuff, whether they will admit it in public or not is a whole other story. If you happen to have one of those women in your company that's consented to the power exchange game, yeah, "they do let you do that. " Tons of women (definitely not all!) enable and are aroused by jerk-like behavior within the context of a consentual relationship. I mean how often have we all seen the hot chicks with douchebags meme play out in real life? More than anyone could ever count.

The problem with his commentary is most of the people viewing it see and speak in vanilla when it comes to sex and relationship
dynamics. They think that "their world after consent is given" is the same as everyone else's, it definitely isn't...

I do think his response "oh its locker room talk" excuse didn't help matters. That's a poor way of explaining it away. I also think he was likely embellishing a lot of things, but the last thing people like him want to do is admit that they're blowing smoke up
peoples asses. (I mean lets face facts, he does that all the time with a lot of other things. Oh mexico will pay for the wall, etc, blah blah).

The presidents as jerks thing is almost a tradition now though. Bush Sr. and Reagan didn't have much of that going on though, but after Clinton came along it was all downhill. Obama? probably smart (and boring) enough to avoid compromising himself via idle commentary. I think the only thing that actually saved Trump is that he's always been kind of known as being a douche to some
people, so it all got written off as par for the course. I think it's also telling in respect to how bad shitlery was as a candidate, and how stupid the DNC was for propping her up. [rofl] Middle americans thought - "Wow this guy is an arrogant NYC douche.... but Hillary... that broad is pure concentrated evil, I can smell her sewage rotting from here"

ETA: On further review the whole thing reeks of him blowing smoke up Billy Bush's backside in a 110% lame attempt at trying to impress him. It almost seems fake, too. It reminds me of like, say, some a**h*** that would brag about shooting cats in his neighborhood for the hell of it, even though the reality is he'd never have the balls to actually do that, but likes to say that he does so he can seem "macho" or some bullshit like that. This is from the "trump cheats at golf" department, almost.

-Mike
 
Last edited:
I'm pretty sure you said modern women want rich, powerful men to grab their vaginas without asking. And that it's perfectly hunky-dory for Trump to have done just that.

No? If not, please elaborate.

Nowhere in my post was the word "vaginas" nor "want" nor "grab." Your interpretation of my post is not at all accurate.

We have already established that:

1. This was most certainly not a literal grabbing of crotches, but a metaphor
2. The act was consensual, which was the entire basis for Trump's bragging; the women would not be so receptive to such rapid advances from ordinary men, but from Trump, they were

A more accurate interpretation of the main point of my post is that women are much more likely to accept sexual advances from men they are more attracted to. Generally, wealth and status are attractive attributes for men to have. This is not a generalization but an observable behavior, backed up by statistical data. Likewise, for example, it is not a generalization to say "most murders are committed by men" because that is also an empirically observable fact.

Trump's wealth and status made him attractive to many women and thus he found that it was incredibly easy to make rapid sexual progress with women. Being egocentric, which is one of my few criticisms of the man, of course he would brag about that, which is what you hear on the tape. Being crass, which is actually something I like about the man, he brags in crass terms. That is not sexual assault. It's not even sexual battery. It is misrepresented as those things by people who don't like him.
 
We have already established that:

1. This was most certainly not a literal grabbing of crotches, but a metaphor
2. The act was consensual, which was the entire basis for Trump's bragging; the women would not be so receptive to such rapid advances from ordinary men, but from Trump, they were

Not sure if serious. “We” is an interesting way for you to spell “I,” because I certainly don’t buy either of those two assertions.
 
That would be plausible until you consider the entire dialogue, which you seem to not have done:
What you seem to have not done, is consider that his words don't just impact the willing gold diggers. They are heard by women who weren't willing, but remember being powerless to respond, and such "boys will be boys" banter makes them experience it all over again.


Only know a few women, huh?
I've listened to their stories. If the the women you know won't talk to you about things like this, it's for good reason.
 
We have already established that:

1. This was most certainly not a literal grabbing of crotches, but a metaphor
2. The act was consensual, which was the entire basis for Trump's bragging; the women would not be so receptive to such rapid advances from ordinary men, but from Trump, they were

You haven't established that at all. You are assuming that, claiming it as fact, and then claiming that everyone agrees with you.

You are being completely dishonest.
 
I mean how often have we all seen the hot chicks with douchebags meme play out in real life?
CzM2CTB.jpg


The presidents as jerks thing is almost a tradition now though. Bush Sr. and Reagan didn't have much of that going on though ...
Washington Examiner:
Barbara Bush was suicidal over husband’s decadelong affair with Jennifer Fitzgerald: Book
 
Last edited:
Not sure if serious. “We” is an interesting way for you to spell “I,” because I certainly don’t buy either of those two assertions.
You haven't established that at all. You are assuming that, claiming it as fact, and then claiming that everyone agrees with you.

You are being completely dishonest.

I never claimed everyone agrees with me. Until we have a crystal ball offering us a vision of what Trump did or video camera footage showing us what Trump did, we just have his words. So which is more likely? That Trump physically grabbed women in a way they didn't want, or that it was a metaphor for his conquests in which they were willing participants? If you can't accept that not even the most misogynist, lewdest pickup artist would ever suggest doing the former, we will forever be at loggerheads on this. Grabbing a woman by the crotch is not something that would work as a sexual advance, not for Trump, not even for Fabio.

Moreover, it is telling that you continue to attack the way I say what I say, rather than my argument.

What you seem to have not done, is consider that his words don't just impact the willing gold diggers. They are heard by women who weren't willing, but remember being powerless to respond, and such "boys will be boys" banter makes them experience it all over again.

I was taught "sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me." Punish actions, not words. You know, actions, like when Hillary helped acquit a child molester (and laughed about it on tape), or when Bill forced an intern to blow him (and then lied about it on tape). But I'm sure all those women you refer to were just as upset at Bill and Hillary's actions as they were at Trump's words.

I've listened to their stories. If the the women you know won't talk to you about things like this, it's for good reason.

False dichotomy.
 
Moreover, it is telling that you continue to attack the way I say what I say, rather than my argument.

Uh huh.

Your “argument” is that women enjoy getting their crotches grabbed by powerful men without being asked. Right? Or that women generally lose control of their sexual judgement when confronted by ugly rich men?

No. I don’t have to attack that. It’s completely ludicrous to anyone who’s known more than, say, two self-respecting women in their life.
 
Your “argument” is that women enjoy getting their crotches grabbed by powerful men without being asked. Right? Or that women generally lose control of their sexual judgement when confronted by ugly rich men?

Neither. My argument is that it is a fallacy to label Trump a sexual predator or think that he is a sexual predator because of what he said on the tape, based on both the absurdity of the literal act working as a sexual proposition, which it wouldn't, and based on Trump's, known, documented, and extensive history of (consensual) relationships with females. It is simple deductive reasoning. The man was on the cover of a newspaper with the headline "BEST SEX I EVER HAD." He has children by three different wives. He is objectively a ladies' man, if such a thing can possibly be objective.

I never said nor even hinted anything about any woman wanting a man to grab her crotch without being asked, and even elaborated on the ridiculousness of such a notion. Nor did I say anything about women losing control of their judgement. Quite the contrary, wealth is one of many measures by which a woman (or man) may judge a person's suitability as a potential partner.

No. I don’t have to attack that. It’s completely ludicrous to anyone who’s known more than, say, two self-respecting women in their life.

Ignoring that this part of your post is in response to something I never said, it is not a good argument strategy to say that someone who disagrees with your position must not know enough women. I know plenty of women who think Trump is a predator because of the tapes and plenty who think just the opposite.
 
Neither. My argument is that it is a fallacy to label Trump a sexual predator or think that he is a sexual predator because of what he said on the tape, based on both the absurdity of the literal act working as a sexual proposition, which it wouldn't, and based on Trump's, known, documented, and extensive history of (consensual) relationships with females. It is simple deductive reasoning. The man was on the cover of a newspaper with the headline "BEST SEX I EVER HAD." He has children by three different wives. He is objectively a ladies' man, if such a thing can possibly be objective.

I never said nor even hinted anything about any woman wanting a man to grab her crotch without being asked, and even elaborated on the ridiculousness of such a notion. Nor did I say anything about women losing control of their judgement. Quite the contrary, wealth is one of many measures by which a woman (or man) may judge a person's suitability as a potential partner.



Ignoring that this part of your post is in response to something I never said, it is not a good argument strategy to say that someone who disagrees with your position must not know enough women. I know plenty of women who think Trump is a predator because of the tapes and plenty who think just the opposite.

Cute, but it’s not about the number of women. You missed that point, too. It’s about the fact that women are not as simple as you seem to think, your confusing protests aside.

Whatever. You’re determined to misconstrue replies in an attempt to justify Trump’s poor moral choices. That’s your business.
 
Cute, but it’s not about the number of women. You missed that point, too. It’s about the fact that women are not as simple as you seem to think, your confusing protests aside.

Whatever. You’re determined to misconstrue replies in an attempt to justify Trump’s poor moral choices. That’s your business.

That's a great job mimicking my tone and replaying my rebuttals against me, albeit without merit. You have not addressed my argument. You are putting words in my mouth and arguing based on hearsay and emotion. Let me know if and when you want to have a big boy discussion.
 
Back
Top Bottom