Hypocrisy factor: absurd. Powerful women's love lives off limits. Only women's.

[Seawytch]

Why do idiots think that it's empowering women to constantly assume we are weak and pathetic? For every man who weaponizes a 'position of power' to benefit his penis, there's a woman out there weaponizing her vagina for the benefit of her career. Let's stop pretending otherwise.

Plenty of us have, after all, spent an awful lot of time discussing Bill Clinton’s willie and Anthony Weiner’s wiener: it’s not that we don’t talk about the sexual predilections of male candidates.

But we do talk about them in a different way. We talk about men abusing power. We talk about women not even deserving power. The distinction matters, because the conversation isn’t really about sex, it’s about legitimacy. It’s about who we think has earned the right to be successful, and what criteria we’ll invent, and who we’ll apply it to.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...e19b78-2325-11e9-81fd-b7b05d5bed90_story.html

From your link:

Does it help your career, to date someone powerful? I’d assume so. Does it also help to play golf with someone powerful, or smoke cigars with someone powerful, or belong to Skull and Bones? I’d assume that, too. But for decades we’ve accepted those relationships — many of which benefited only men — as standard procedure for how executives and politicians get ahead. In August, ProPublica published a story about a trifecta of Mar-a-Lago members exerting influence over the Department of Veterans Affairs. None of them had military or government experience, but they did have long-standing acquaintanceships with the president.

Was Harris the only appropriate candidate for the commissions to which Brown appointed her? I don’t know.

I do know that by the time she met Brown, she’d already graduated from Howard University, where she’d been elected to the student government and the lauded debate team, and she’d already graduated from law school, and she was already working as a deputy district attorney in one of the most populous counties in the United States — and maybe, just maybe, she was already going places on her own?
​

 

[Olde Europe]

As I said elsewhere:



No one, literally, gets anywhere in politics without a network of support. Just when a woman gets support, that somehow conclusively demonstrates her incapacity.

That's a given.

And yet, in case she also is sexually active, all hell breaks loose. They may not maintain much otherwise, but the troglodyte geezers' spluttering apoplexy lasts just about forever.

Brain dead, laden to the hilt with resentments, and ugly and contemptible whichever way you look at them. In a word, "deplorables".

 

[LordBrownTrout]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

She had an affair with a married man. She whored herself out.

 

[Correll]

Why do idiots think that it's empowering women to constantly assume we are weak and pathetic? For every man who weaponizes a 'position of power' to benefit his penis, there's a woman out there weaponizing her vagina for the benefit of her career. Let's stop pretending otherwise.

Plenty of us have, after all, spent an awful lot of time discussing Bill Clinton’s willie and Anthony Weiner’s wiener: it’s not that we don’t talk about the sexual predilections of male candidates.

But we do talk about them in a different way. We talk about men abusing power. We talk about women not even deserving power. The distinction matters, because the conversation isn’t really about sex, it’s about legitimacy. It’s about who we think has earned the right to be successful, and what criteria we’ll invent, and who we’ll apply it to.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...e19b78-2325-11e9-81fd-b7b05d5bed90_story.html

Attack a woman for doing something wrong is not saying that women as a group should not have power.


Your link is behind a pay wall btw, but I am curious what "special harm" we are doing is discussing a woman's "love life" which is a very generous term here.

 

[Correll]

[...] there's a woman out there weaponizing her vagina [...]

Before long, they're growing teeth.

Frightened little manikins' panic at the mere thought of women gaining power (read: emasculating men) is never not going to be funny. The consequences thereof, from burning witches to today's smear campaigns and character assassinations (remember Hillary's child trafficking ring?), are anything but.

When, finally, will men choose to grow up and realize their need to dominate women isn't a sign of strength? For it's the exact opposite thereof.

Isn't that so, "Stormy"?

Attacking an individual woman for bad behavior, is not evidence of any "panic at the mere thought of women gaining power".

 

[iceberg]

Oh geez, you know how fragile white male patriarchy is right about now don't you?

yea, go rag on some MMA fighters and tell them how fragile they are.

 

[iceberg]

Oh geez, you know how fragile white male patriarchy is right about now don't you?

Not as fragile as you believe, homo!

Well ya'll might wanna tighten up on the wailing and moaning if you'd like to be taken more seriously.

well Y'ALL might want to stop bitching at white men all the time and get off the attack wagon if you want to be taken seriously.

 

[Correll]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

She had an affair with a married man. She whored herself out.

Having an affair with a married man is slutty. Doing it for financial gain, makes is prostitution.

 

[Correll]

Don't even try to go there with me, you pathetic weakling. Men don't feel they need to dominate women. Stop painting with one- size-fits-all panties. We have plenty of ability to be strong, powerful people. Just because you don't doesn't mean it's someone else's fault. Stop being a victim and start being a winner.

Yeah, there's going to be a slew of other INCELs arriving, fantasizing about women's sex lives - just not with them. The discombobulated nonsense is going to be hilarious. Just...

Stop painting with one- size-fits-all panties.​

... there's one even painting with panties. It's sure going to get better...

Ludicrous.

Her behavior was morally and ethically and perhaps legally wrong.


She deserves to be judged on her actions, and the content of her character.


This is not about fantasizing about her sex life.




IF, you support her politically, you have to take this hit and make the case that she deserves to be President despite her minuses, like we did with Trump.

 

[Correll]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

What about the other applicants for those early jobs? Do you think it was fair for them to be competing against a woman who was having sex with the mayor?

 

[TNHarley]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

Is that why the right got excited when that chick from hawaii announced?
Drop your parroting FFS. It doesnt look good on you

 

[Dragonlady]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

What about the other applicants for those early jobs? Do you think it was fair for them to be competing against a woman who was having sex with the mayor?

Depends on their qualifications. Were they more qualified than Harris? Harris isn't some brainless bimbo the mayor was banging. She is a highly educated, successful prosecutor, who was appointed to crime commissions, where her work was considered groundbreaking. This lead to her run for and winning election as the California Attorney General. Her work as California AG lead to be being considered a leading candidate for US AG. Harris was a rising star when she met Brown, and would have been this spectacularly successful with or without his assistance.

What you seem to be seriously suggesting is that women who work in politics can never receive a career benefit from friendships with people they meet at work. That if a man thinks a woman is bright and talented, if he dates her, he can never help her career, even if she is well qualified and capable.

Last but not least, why are you putting rules on female politicians that don't apply to men?

 

[easyt65]

'Hypocrisy factor: absurd. Powerful women's love lives off limits. Only women's.'


ANYTHING EMBARASSING or NEGATIVE regarding Democrats is 'OFF-LIMITS', ESPECIALLY SEXUAL MISCONDUCT / BEHAVIOR.

PRESIDENT Bill Clinton - Monica Lewinski Scandal
President Bill Clinton is caught having a sexual affair with an intern in the WH.

Democrats / Snowflakes Defense:
"Whatever happens in a President's Personal Life Is No One's Business But His Own!"

CITIZEN Donald Trump - Stormy Daniels Affair
News Broke of CITIZEN Donald Trump's affair with Stormy Daniels and the perfectly legal Non-Disclosure Agreement they both consensually agreed to.
- Democrats / Snowflakes broke out the pitch forks and torches, demanding the President be Impeached for an affair he had PRIOR to entering the race for President.

WHAT HAPPENED TO "WHATEVER HAPPENS IN A PRESIDENT'S - OR IN TRUMP'S CASE, A CIVILIAN'S - PERSONAL LIFE IS NO ONE ELSE'S BUSINESS"?!

It seems that only applies to Democrats...

Democrats broke out their favorite tactic of 'The Politics of Personal Destruction', in which the objective is not to just defeat an opponent politically but to destroy every aspect of their opponent's life - past, present, future, the ability to keep their job, the ability to ever get another job, their wife, their husband, their kids, their marriage, etc... The tactic became 'affectionately known' as 'Herman Cain'ing. It involves dragging women out of the proverbial woodwork to (falsely) accuse the target of sexual misconduct, bury them with law suits, and hammering them with the fake news media. Herman Cain. Brett Kavanaugh. Donald Trump. The technique has been used against all of them. Democrats? Not so much...

Bill Clinton: 'Nunya Bidness'

Did he even face Ethics Violations...Censure? NO.

Democrat Senators: 'Nothing to see here.'
** Democrats were caught not only engaging in sexual misconduct for DECADES, but they refused to stop it and chose instead to create a committee whose sole purpose was to buy the silence of their victims using tax dollars to do so. Were they dragged before committees on national TV, vilified, demonized, hammered by the media? Did they face Ethics Violations / Censure? No...it quietly went away.


Kamala Harris Affair: 'Nunya Bidness...Nothing To See Here'

Was she dragged before committees on national TV, vilified, demonized, hammered by the media? Did she face Ethics violations...Censure? No...it quietly went away.


Corey 'I Am Spartacus' Booker Admission Of Sexual Assault: 'Nothing To See Here.'

Was he dragged before committees on national TV, vilified, demonized, hammered by the media? Did she face Ethics violations...Censure? No...it quietly went away.



Hypocrisy factor: OFF THE CHART!

 

[Correll]

And one of those who weaponized her vagina is seeking to become the president. This should be good.

She didn't "weaponize her vagina". She had a relationshiop with a man. Period. End of story.

If you think this woman wouldn't be as successful as she was without her "connections" you are too stupid to be allowed to vote. You and your asshole friends are terrified of a woman president.

What about the other applicants for those early jobs? Do you think it was fair for them to be competing against a woman who was having sex with the mayor?

Depends on their qualifications. Were they more qualified than Harris? Harris isn't some brainless bimbo the mayor was banging. She is a highly educated, successful prosecutor, who was appointed to crime commissions, where her work was considered groundbreaking. This lead to her run for and winning election as the California Attorney General. Her work as California AG lead to be being considered a leading candidate for US AG. Harris was a rising star when she met Brown, and would have been this spectacularly successful with or without his assistance.

What you seem to be seriously suggesting is that women who work in politics can never receive a career benefit from friendships with people they meet at work. That if a man thinks a woman is bright and talented, if he dates her, he can never help her career, even if she is well qualified and capable.

Last but not least, why are you putting rules on female politicians that don't apply to men?

Having sex with someone is not the same as friendship.


Are you seriously not seeing the conflict of interest here, with mayor just happening to realize that the most qualified candidate just happened to be the woman that was having sex with him?



And if a man was behaving in a similar fashion, I would consider it just as questionable.

 

[there4eyeM]

Harris has no credentials that suit her to be President any more than a substantial percentage of the entire nation.

 

[Correll]

Harris has no credentials that suit her to be President any more than a substantial percentage of the entire nation.

I've certainly heard no libs, arguing any great qualifications.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

We don't have powerful women in this country. We have women with delusions of power.

 

[Olde Europe]

Harris has no credentials that suit her to be President any more than a substantial percentage of the entire nation.

What would be the credentials Harris does have, in your opinion?

What is the "substantial percentage", roughly, and how did you figure out they have at least the credentials Harris has?

How did you find out which credentials suit anyone to be President, and which are they?

Oh, BTW, you got argument-by-assertion down pat. Just... among those committed to reasoned debate, that skill is occasionally frowned upon.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Anyone discussing Melania sordid past gets sued

You mean LYING about her past? I mean she has proven over and over they are lies and yet you think you can repeat them.....

 

[there4eyeM]

Harris has no credentials that suit her to be President any more than a substantial percentage of the entire nation.

What would be the credentials Harris does have, in your opinion?

What is the "substantial percentage", roughly, and how did you figure out they have at least the credentials Harris has?

How did you find out which credentials suit anyone to be President, and which are they?

Oh, BTW, you got argument-by-assertion down pat. Just... among those committed to reasoned debate, that skill is occasionally frowned upon.

You want that she does not have the necessary to be POTUS to be proven to you?