The last few days has led me to think that the left needs to have a discussion on sexual liberation.

[Skidmore]

I've seen name calling labeling people as prudes, hypocrites, and what have you over this last political disaster. Now when I was a young woman we talked about sexual liberation in the the context of having control over our own bodies and reproductive rights. There was a time in this nation when many women did not have a whole lot to say about their life partners or their their reproductive rights. Sadly, we appear to be slipping back down that slope that took so long to scale.

I realize that the concept of liberation has expanded over the decades. I do not include the GLBT movement under this category now because I consider this area to be in the area of basic civil rights. I do think that sexual liberation is another issue entirely. I do not embrace the notion that all sexual behavior is acceptable within greater society. Even some behaviors among consenting adults is not. In that category, I would fit the fantasy behavior of that couple in Germany who did the cannibal/dinner menu bit a few years ago. I also include pedophilia, incest, rape, sexual torture, and human trafficking for sexual exploitation.

Aside from the legalities of sexual behavior, there is a really gray area which involves boundaries, consent, and respect. This was what disturbed me most about some of the defenses for Weiner this past week. Presuming that because someone who has engaged in a behavior has done so with consent was a step too far. From my own experience in life, I know that quite often those who have had boundaries violated or have been intimidated sexually will not readily speak out. There are more people involved in this man's activities than just himself. Sexual liberation does not account for his need to literally be in women's faces with his masculinity. The behavior itself does not speak to a sense of boundaries and respect for the other.

That is where I stand. I'm no prude and have enjoyed many years with my own partners in life. I just think we need to decide what we mean sometimes when we fling around labels and ideas.

I welcome your contributions. Please leave the snark for elsewhere. I'm hoping we can have a constructive discussion here.

[MineralMan]

1. Earlier today, someone asked if it was progressive

to treat people like sexual objects. I thought that was a good question, and appropriate to the Weiner situation. At the very least, he behaved in a strange way for a congressman, and I'm not sure he treated the people to whom he texted and sent photos properly. He may have voted progressively, but doesn't evidence that in his private live, IMO.

Lying about personal behavior is also not a progressive value, as far as I am concerned.

Weiner's gone. Now, it's time to focus on who will replace him and on other issues, like the upcoming NY Senate vote on marriage equality. The news marches forward...always forward.

[Skidmore]

3. You have touched on two important concerns I have had this past week.

I do not consider the notion that it is okay to treat people with disrespect and to lie to be progressive at all. I found my self frequently wondering this week if to be on the receiving end of such behavior was what we had fought so hard for in the 1960s.

[MineralMan]

4. Weiner consistently voted in progressive ways, and

called for progressive measures. That's a very good thing. Unfortunately, he lost his seat and bully pulpit by behaving poorly. A lesson is there to be learned, I think. I admire the positions he took. I cannot admire his behavior. It's all one thing, really. We need people who are the entire package, not just part of it.

[VWolf]

5. Well said, although I would have avoided

using the phrase "entire package"

:hide:

[MineralMan]

6. LOL! You have a point.

I guess I'm so old I don't think of that when I use the word "package." :rofl:

[Skidmore]

8. In regard to Weiner, I agree with you. I should have been clearer

in my response though. I found many of the defenses of Weiner to be pretty icky as the argument made appeared to be that anything is okay as long as you are a progressive.

[MineralMan]

10. I understood that you meant that.

The ends do not always justify the means, in my opinion. In the long term, we need to be the party of excellence in all aspects. We should not tolerate poor behavior like the Republicans do. That's my opinion.

[Warpy]

23. Good luck getting that complete package, it's an impossible standard

The far right knows it's an impossible standard and that's why they leave their dirtbags in office.

I think the only way to deal with prudes is to admit to everything, even stuff you didn't do, grin, and say it was fantastic. Ball's in your court, pruneface.

Until we recognize that normal people are sexual beings and that all great men (and some women) have had feet of clay during their lives, we'll continue to let the far right drive good people out of office for things they accept in their own without batting an eyelash.

I am ashamed of all the Democrats who drove him out of office.

[MineralMan]

32. Hmm...I'm not actually sure that's true, really.

I've known some straight-shooters who were politicians. It's not impossible. Truly, it's not. Maybe what's needed is for us to set a higher standard.

[Warpy]

53. Or a lower one

I'd rather have an oversexed man or woman who gets the job done for the people of this country instead of taking the easy way out and sucking up to corporations and wealthy men.

If you would rather elect Popes than politicians, perhaps you need to join the church.

[MineralMan]

57. Politics is a continuum, and what one person accepts in

a politician may differ from what another accepts. I do not accept that personal integrity and behavior must be ignored in our politicians. As an atheist, I'm not all that interested in churches. I am, however, interested in the ethics and standards of politicians I support. You may not be. That's your deal, really. I have my own standards for such things. Last I heard, I'm still part of the process, and am still able to hold opinions on the matter. You let me know if that status changes, though. I'll be grateful. I wouldn't want to miss that bit of information.

[REP]

102. "People don't have their virtues and vices in sets: they have them anyhow: all mixed." - GB Shaw

I read this in Heartbreak House when I was quite young, and it struck me as a good lesson.

[Whisp]

20. Wiener lovers killed Atticus Finch.

it's okay to lie, everyone does it!

lets teach our kids that - and next up is:

Greed is Good!
yah! enough of this moldy old morality stuff.

[kestrel91316]

7. There is a time and place for being treated like a sex object.

Generally two mutually consenting adults are involved and the ground rules are understood.

[KarenS]

2. I agree with you wholeheartedly on this,,,,, K&R n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

9. The "victim" of the text messages did speak out.

For six months. She was a fully engaged participant.

You're in denial of the role of his chat partners.

Aside from progressives in general, Weiner is the only one who's lost anything over this.

[MineralMan]

11. One of them has spoken out. Just one.

I'm keeping that in mind, too.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

29. Maybe the others are keeping it private because it is Just That, PRIVATE!

[MineralMan]

31. Very likely. I wouldn't bring it up if I had been involved, either.

Embarrassing, at the least.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

66. Maybe not embarrassing. I've had phone and cybersex but no need to share with whom.

[Skidmore]

69. That's more than I needed to know about you.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

88. Yes, a sexually liberated Progressive woman and you got info overload.

BTW... I've been celibate for several years. My choice which is also part of being liberated.

[Skidmore]

90. As it should be.

[Maru Kitteh]

114. There is nothing private about social media. - and three have talked.

The initial young woman.
The under-age girl he was exchanging private messages with. (she came on to him but instead of ending communications he continued to exchange DM's with her)
The porn star.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

120. The college girl and teenager were not sexting partners of his, so they are irrelevant to

my discussion here. And DMs are private as are personal texts.

[Maru Kitteh]

122. anyone who believes that "private" messages on social media are really private is a fool.

It's like going to a party. You can pull someone aside and whisper a conversation you think will remain private - but if you have any brains at all you won't share anything that would ruin you if it is overheard.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

123. Of course there are hackers and those who want to share their private communications but in

theory, what stays in a PM is meant to stay in a PM. Just like our emails...

[Maru Kitteh]

124. and again, given that he was exchanging with strangers, the party analogy works quite well here.

If I whisper something to a stranger at a party, what reasonable person believes I have any real expectation of confidence? I don't.

[Skidmore]

12. I do believe there were at least six "chat partners' that we've heard of

and there may be more. Who knows who they were and what the terms of interaction were. I don't think it is safe to assume that all interactions were the same.

[lumberjack_jeff]

14. So in the interest of being safe, he should resign.

After all, we don't know what he might have said to some hypothetical person.

[Skidmore]

27. You need to take that up with him and his wife.

Frankly, I believe his resignation was essential because his behavior rendered him ineffective in his public office.

[pnwmom]

28. We know what he said to Ginger Lee, because she went public yesterday.

She didn't consent to sex talk, but he made repeated references to his "package" in political discussions with her.

[sabrina 1]

41. And all of them were grown women.

Why is this anyone's business, other than those who view sex as a morality issue?? Those women themselves may have had other cyber sex partners also, again it is not our business, is it?

Breitbart made it our business and Democrats, as always, did what Breitbart wanted. One more victory for the far right.

[sabrina 1]

15. Thank you! Infantalizing women, constantly assuming that

that they are incapable of making decisions regarding what kind of sex they wish to participate in, that they must always be victims, is simply insulting to grown, adult women.

Re Cyber Sex, there is a 'delete' function on everyone's computer. Any woman who did not want to participate only had to hit 'delete'. They did not, to me that says they were fully capable of making the decisions they made.

I think the continuing image of women of poor victims of men, needs to change. It shows how far women have to go before being credited with the ability to make their own decisions.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. +1

[LadyHawkAZ]

18. Agreed. Definitely agreed. n/t

[Skidmore]

24. Women can be both victims and victimizers both.

I do think that we don't know all the facts here. Nor can we assume that all involved knew what they were getting into, particularly since there was an indication that possibly a young girl had been contacted by him. It seemed to me that that bit of information was quickly passed over and kept really sketchy on purpose.

I would also point out that in today's culture the notion of a woman as a sexual creature is an infantilized image. Pouty lips, baby steps taken in stillettos, tiny little costumes that pass for clothing. Women who do not match the Barbie doll image physically are labelled cows or pigs and not viewed as sexual individuals at all. Now young girls, very young girls, are marketed to with products that mimic those of used by grown women. We have had discussion of this on this board.

Lastly, I would point out that for all the talk in society about choices for women, we are currently seeing a narrowing of aspirational goals in the public media. I see lots of programming putting out role models of high maintenance housewife, elite model, reality show star, and diva. If you can't do this, then retail on cosmetics or suggestive clothing on QVC. Most of these are reachable by most girls and are also highly sexualized images of womanhood.

[sabrina 1]

34. The 'young girl' was a 21 year old woman.

She has spoken clearly about the issue herself, and I accept her version of the story, rather than that of the moralists and of Weiner's political enemies who would like to use her to go after a liberal Congressman. Ignoring her own statements and continuing to use her is exactly what I am talking about. As she said 'she doesn't care' about the photo which may have been sent to her by accident anyhow, meant for a different woman, either way she is not reaching for the smelling salts so why are people still trying to paint her as a victim DESPITE her efforts to make it clear that she is not?

edited to say, Monica Lewinsky was a 22 year old woman and again, Clinton's political enemies developed a sudden 'concern' for her welfare which was never in evidence before regarding women in general. So, I really wish democrats at least would stop using women who have spoken for themselves already, as tools to make their points regarding unrelated issues.

If you don't like what Weiner did, then you can't like what the women did either. They are equally responsible for the years long, or months long voluntary cyber sexual encounters. Treating them as poor victims IS an insult. All of them had a simple way out, they did not take it. All were adults and some may have engaged in cyber sex with other men also. But that is their business.

The reason why women are being targeted like little girls by Madison Ave. is because even on the left, they are still viewed that way, as this case has exposed so completely.

[Matariki]

43. Great posts Sabrina. Thank you.

[femrap]

49. I think you forget that we

live in Patriarchy. Just look at what Bill Clinton is doing today.....and what Monica Lewinsky is doing. Whose reputation was ruined?

Do you ever read IBlamethePatriarchy.com? I highly recommend it only because it makes clear that our culture HATES women. And to think otherwise...well, you just end up being a tool.

And I'm sorry....this sexting went on for years??? And did the women 'flash' their package to him??

No, it's the little girls being sexualized at a very early age. They now sell bras to little 6 year-old girls.

[sabrina 1]

51. We don't know what the women sent him, he has not revealed

that. He is not, after Andrew Breitbart who has zero respect for people's right to privacy regarding their sex lives. The Cyber sex did according him and without denials from the women, go on for three years. At any time during that time, any woman who was not enjoying herself as much as he was, could have made him disappear. Same rules apply to women and men as far as I am concerned. It takes two to tango. I am not having cyber sex with anyone, because I choose not to, but if I ever do, that will be a decision made by me, a fully grown woman with a mind of my own, who knows where to find the delete function should I decide to discontinue the relationship at any time.

Why people keep pretending these women have no minds of their own, boggles my mind.

[LadyHawkAZ]

87. *applause*

I agree 100% with everything you have said here.

[marions ghost]

81. agreed

if I had been sent a Weiner pic I would have deleted it & blocked the sender. If anything continued beyond that I would have done something more direct about it. These young women got involved for whatever reason. Not smart maybe, but they did participate. They kept it going. He probably sent it to those he thought would do that.

So now with this public flogging I guess Weiner will finally get the therapy he needs. He does have an exhibitionism problem. This is the turning point in what has likely been a long struggle with the problem.

But to be forced to resign was overkill IMO. I don't see this as about "sexual freedom." I see it as lack of impulse control of a sexual compulsion, but though it is bad behavior this failing does not rise to the level of immediate expulsion from office. I would have preferred to see him keep his seat while getting the right kind of therapy.

I agree with you that the womens' participation changes things. If he had stalked and harassed these women, then I'd show no mercy.

[lumberjack_jeff]

85. Or, as in this case, neither. n/t

[Dappleganger]

38. Exactly. Block is available on Twitter and Facebook as well.

That's called enforcing your boundaries. It's not like he showed up on their doorstep while grabbing his junk.

[femrap]

42. I read that some of the

women tried to bring the subject BACK to their interest of Choice and Women's Rights. He didn't want to talk POLICY.

If I were online w/ my Congressman and he wanted to 'flash' and/or discuss his package, I would provide the rope to let him hang himself. If he was doing this with me, I would know damn well that he was doing the same with others. And I certainly would not lie for him.

If I can reduce the number of dickheads online, I'll do it. I don't care what his job is.

Everything online is PUBLIC.

[sabrina 1]

46. And what you read has been addressed over and over again.

There is not a shred of evidence that any of those women, who are fully grown adults, did not willingly participate.

If you think that people who chose to engage in a perfectly legal, so far, sexual activity online or elsewhere are 'dickheads' that's your privilege. He didn't seem to have any problem finding women, women who btw, may have been engaged with other men also, who were more than willing.

As I said, you think someone is a 'dickhead' online? Simple, delete him and move on. Being a dickhead is not illegal and everyone's idea of what a dickhead is, varies.

Do you favor making Cyber Sex illegal btw? For adults, I mean. If I'm wrong correct me, but you seem to think this kind of sex, which is immensely popular right now, should not be tolerated. And are the women who engage in it 'sluts' in your opinion? Because if men who do it are 'dickheads' what you call women who do it?

[femrap]

50. Please

head over to IBlamethePatriarchy.com

I hope you never are betrayed in the way his wife was. And please feel free to have all the online sex you want. But when it becomes PUBLIC, don't cry 'victim.' Or try to lie.

The man is a married Congressman who should no better...he was stupid to think he would get away with it. And all the lies along the way.

As an old Women's Libber, I believe our experiences are very different and the battles I fought for the younger generation to come was in vain.

Good luck.

[sabrina 1]

59. If I am betrayed in that way, I would hope more than anything

else in the world that a bunch of strange people do not get involved and make my personal problems a media circus. I would like to handle it myself in private, as I am perfectly capable of doing that without the help of far right loonies together with the Leadership of the Democratic Party and the US MSM because THAT would cause me more pain than anything else in such a situation.

That MY private life is being discussed in public by people I do not know and who I know do NOT care about me but are using my pain to further their own agendas. I can't think of anything more disrespectful of a woman's right to deal with her own life than this. And I cannot imagine the pain all of this causing her, total strangers now passing judgement on her relationship with her husband. What a nightmare that would be.

Other people's' marriages are none of our business. But Breitbart runs this party now, making everyone's personal sex life the business of the Dem leadership. How sad.

There are some things worse than cheating spouses in this world. I thought the people had spoken on that during the Clinton administration.

[femrap]

62. Obviously you've

never been in a marriage where the spouse cheated. I've heard people say they would rather have their eye poked out than go through that. Ever been through a divorce?


"There are some things worse than cheating spouses in this world. I thought the people had spoken on that during the Clinton administration." Just what is worse? Having ones legs cut off?

And you want to handle your sex-ploits privately...then you had better be a PRIVATE figure, not a PUBLIC one paid for by taxpayers.

Yes, what a nightmare for her....all caused by the actions of her husband.

I'm done....you have a nice day.

[sabrina 1]

67. All caused by the actions of a sick, prying,

well-funded peeping tom from the far right smear machine. Like Hillary, who was no doubt hurt and angry at her husband's betrayal, but was even more angry at the 'vast rightwing conspiracy' that she identified, correctly at the time as being responsible for the fact that we even knew about it.

She stayed in the marriage and since she is a very smart woman, I imagine she would agree that the worst part of her husband's cheating on her, was the media circus created by what should have remained a private matter despite their status as public figures. They do NOT give up everything when they are elected to public office. However I do believe that because of this notion that people must, we are losing many potentially good leaders who are simply not willing to accept this kind of witch hunting as legitimate or worth it in order to serve the people.

Divorce, a cheating spouse, would have been far preferable to me than what I actually experienced. Pain, I am very familiar with it. Suffice it to say that I know how painful it must be to be betrayed by your spouse, but as Hillary and Bill Clinton have shown there is still hope to retrieve a relationship even after such a betrayal. That is up to the couple.

In other situations though, there is simply no hope of a future, such as the pain of the untimely death of a spouse, at a young age, because of the actions of others eg.

No matter how painful it is to the individuals, it is still no one else's business. I hope one day this country will evolve from where we are now and accept that some areas of a public figure's life should be off limits.

[Maru Kitteh]

116. Why would you infanticize Anthony Weiner like that? Isn't he responsible for his own actions?

Wasn't he a willing participant in his decision to post his penis on the internet to multiple people he didn't know?

[laundry_queen]

92. no no no

I'd have preferred to have my legs cut off with a rusty toenail clipper than have my spouse - the love of my life, I thought - cheat on me and leave me with 4 kids. I belong to a divorce support group and believe me when I say people are beyond traumatized and devastated, some even being treated for a type of chronic PTSD. It's unbelievably painful. I will always side with those who have been betrayed. I side with AW's wife. This is her decision now, and I don't envy her.

[femrap]

99. And to make matters

worse, she is pregnant. She works for HRC as well. I don't believe they have been married long.

[woo me with science]

105. +100000 nt

[Skidmore]

58. That's a rather amazing statement you made

re: cyber sex. I think it kind of sad that people are forgoing actual interactions for electronic media interactions, and I'm not just referring that type of relationship only. There are times I would love to rip a cell phone or blackberry out of someone's hand and toss it as far as I can to get undivided attention.

[sabrina 1]

60. I didn't say what I think of it, but I try to mind my own

business when it comes to other people's sexual preferences.

There was a time, in fact, what am I thinking, we still have not evolved yet in this regard, when Gay sex was judged to be immoral.

I'm sure that back in the fifties and sixties eg, any politician caught with Playboy would have been exposed as a sexual deviant, hypocritically of course since only those caught are judged.

The problem with allowing our own feelings about other people's sexual lives is that we risk assisting the US government to become the moral arbiter of what should be people's personal choices and maybe, making them illegal. As in Saudi Arabia, eg.

What I think of Cyber Sex or any of the other kinds of sex people engage is not what I am arguing over. I am arguing that once there is nothing illegal about the activity, it is none of our business and definitely not the business of the US Government or any of its elected officials.

[femrap]

93. I've read that some people

are now not capable of 'eye contact.' Real life relationships are 'quaint.' I think Gonzalez used that word about our Constitution.

[Withywindle]

119. re: Cyber sex, what we have here is a generational divide.

My generational position: born in 1969, of Boomer parents in their early 20s. That makes me 42 next month --no spring chicken, that's for sure.


My generation came of sexual age in the 80s, when Reagan held sway and AIDS was the big misunderstood scare du jour. (Misunderstood because you could only get REAL information about what it really was if you lived in a metropolitan area that was lucky enough to have real activists working to get info out, like ACT-UP. Otherwise, all you read in the news is that it was gays and junkies spreading a disease to KILL "US" ALL.)

I've never, ever had flesh-and-blood sex without knowing that the possibility of a fatal illness was there if I didn't play my cards exactly right. Even though HIV/AIDS isn't the automatic death sentence it used to be, you still never quite lose the training that comes from your formative teenage years. I have a high enough sex drive that I took the risk often, even still, and I was lucky.

My generation is also the first one where home computers were widespread. My family and my school were both too poor to have them, but I had a few friends who did, and I was AMAZED by watching a friend of mine having conversations about obscure music and obscure SF with people in...Singapore. England. Australia. I WANTED that. This was 1987, when I was still distributing MY little music zine by snail mail and waiting months for letters to come in response.


Fast forward a few decades, and is anyone surprised that some people find the combination of global potential with guarantees of disease/pregnancy/physical-abuse free sexuality pretty damn worthwhile?

No one ever got a disease from cybersex. No one ever got pregnant from cybersex. At least in my experience, the internet is a place where a lot of WOMEN play out fantasies that would be too physically risky in real life.

That is part of my generation's experience with it. Weiner is only 5 years older than me, so his experience is probably similar.

[xphile]

45. Not to mention there's some type of block function in social media as well

akin to the ignore feature here.

Grown ass women participating in cybersex is supposed to get me up in arms to ask for a resignation when we can't, or rather won't prosecute people who actually broke the law. The rest of the world is probably laughing their collective asses off at us yet again.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

61. The rest of the civiliized world is laughing.

Saudi Arabia however, is probably applauding.

[Skidmore]

63. Seems to me the civilized world has enough problems of its own

right now to be attending too closely to one congressman.

[xphile]

77. It's not the congressman but the stupid nature of this so-called scandal that I

suspect is being laughed at. And considering that this country has more important problems than some stupid dick pic, and we can't manage to work past it... :shrug:

I'll stand by the concept that the rest of the world is probably laughing their asses off at us yet again.

And we fucking deserve it.

[woo me with science]

104. Thank you. nt

[Withywindle]

126. Thank you, sabra

If women's right to say "no" isn't respected, how can our right to say "yes" be respected?

As a woman, I want whatever I say to be listened to and respected firmly. NO means NO, and YES means YES. (Even if I regret my YES later, it's still my word as a human adult, and I am responsible for it!)

No one has ever been raped online (hit "delete" and/or "block"; that means NO.). No one has ever caught an STD or unwanted pregnancy online (because it's fucking TYPING, not sex.)

[pnwmom]

26. There were 5 others. Ginger Lee clearly stated yesterday that she did NOT consent

and that she changed the subject each time he made a suggestive comment (usually referring to his package.)

[sabrina 1]

68. She is a grown woman is she not? Was she unaware of the

delete function???

Sorry, her assuming this 'victim' status is probably one of the funniest aspects of this situation.

Poor Ginger Lee, she just couldn't get that delete function to work for all those months, or was it years in her case?

Please, tell her to stop. Some of us are not that stupid.

[pnwmom]

82. She was interested in health care issues and was trying to discuss that topic.

Are porn stars not allowed to have concerns about social issues?

[sabrina 1]

86. Again, and btw, who said anything about her status as a porn

star having anything to do with her ridiculous claims, if someone isn't interested in discussing what you are interested in discussing online, all you have to do is delete them and go find someone who is. I have three-year olds I would not accept this from.

Sorry, the woman is a phony. I'm sure she will write a book about her 'suffering' and it will be published by Regnery, if it hasn't been written already for her by the far right operatives who have a vested interest in destroying liberals.

I'm amused by the morality police who always surface at times like this. The truth about the sudden pearl clutching over morals can be easily explained imho. Oscar Wilde said it very sucinctly morality is simply the attitude we develot towards people we do not like.

I wonder who she is working for?

[Warren Stupidity]

74. The "porn star"? The same one who also texted her infatuation with

Weiner to her friends? That Ginger Lee? Seriously? The seriously offended Ms Lee will be stripping tonight in front of a bunch of men stroking their packages.

[pnwmom]

83. Since when are porn stars not supposed to be able to have political discussions

with their representatives without sex being involved?

[Warren Stupidity]

84. since when did I say they aren't?

I question her assertion made by her vastly sleezy lawyer that she was deeply offended by the several off-color references Weiner made over the course of 100s of message exchanges over several months. An offense so deep that Ms Lee was unable to discontinue the exchange. I suggest that she and her lawyer are not being exactly forthcoming.

[femrap]

94. Oink.

You know the only jobs for young women today are strippers. And a stripper does not make one a 'pron star.'

I read that article....first she was called a pron star and then a stripper. You see nothing sexist about that???

Where are the male strippers????

[justiceischeap]

13. It's about the lying and stupidity for me

He should have never intimated that he was going to start an investigation, or that he'd been hacked. Then the stupidity to think that sending sexual photos over a social networking site would somehow engender him some privacy is stupidity. I know Weiner has done some great things for the party but really, dude can't be that smart if he thought he could send dick pics on Twitter, then lie about it.

[femrap]

54. +1 nt

[EFerrari]

16. I agree with you about bad boundaries and respect.

Probably like a lot of women here at DU, I grew up in the company of men who violated my boundaries all the time. In social situations, at work, in public. It was part of every day life, that negotiation to defend your boundaries in a culture that largely overlooked those violations. It's good to know that in a lot of ways, that crap isn't as acceptable any more.

However, the man apologized for his behavior. Doesn't that put to rest the question of whether it was appropriate or not? Let alone "progressive".

The truth is, public outcry doesn't fix bad boundaries in a situation like this. Social pressure helps but it's having women assert that line over and over that does it. I don't have any sense that the women he approached were unable to do that or why we should assume that they couldn't -- any more than we should assume they consented.

And since those individual responses to boundary violations really are the cure, it behooves us to spend as much time supporting women drawing that line as we do castigating someone who may have overstepped, imo.

[Skidmore]

47. I am in general agreement with you, as long as

we do not lose sight of the fact that there are women and men out here who have trouble drawing boundaries or protecting them.

[Stinky The Clown]

19. "pedophilia, incest, rape, sexual torture, and human trafficking for sexual exploitation" are not ..

.... "sexual behaviors". They are crimes, often violent crimes.

That cannibal/dinner thing probably was sexual behavior, but more importantly, is deviant in the extreme.

Blow jobs, sexting, even adultery and fathering children with a partner not your wife, even if you have a wife, are various things to various people. You don't need to know what they are to me and I don't need to know what they are to.

I suspect we agree on 99% of what you wrote and implied in your post.

Using Weiner as an example (I am not attempting to debate anything about Weiner here except as it serves as an example in the larger intellectual discussion you're hoping to have) if he sent an unsolicited picture to someone, that's kinda creepy, but not all that out of the mainstream. If he sent it and was asked not to do it again, and then did it again, that goes to what you cite and I agree completely.

But if he did it, and got back a response that inferred a willingness to continue communicating, there's nothing at all wrong with that. A later "no" might get one more picture, and, generally, I am okay with that, just one more time. Like the first, its creepy. A second, firm "no" should be all that is needed to stop everyone, however. Going beyond that crosses the line.

Boundaries are fluid. Respect helps to mitigate that.

[Skidmore]

25. They are crimes using sex

as the vehicle for violence and I excluded them for a reason.

[unblock]

21. a "scandal" is what POWER makes of it. weiner lost because he's a liberal and a firebrand

no politician can become a congresscritter without at some point, on some level, doing something that could be made into a scandal. in fact, the same could be said for most adults, period.

contrary to everything the media would have you believe, it's NOT about the nature of the scandal itself, it's about all about POWER.

if the various powers that be decide they want you gone, they will work tremendously hard to make you gone, and they will find or manufacture a scandal and play it up for all it's worth until you are gone.

if the various powers that be decide they want to keep you, then you will likely not hear of any scandal, or hear it dismissed as lies and hearsay or partisan liberal attacks or whatever.

we all know this to be true, of course. we've seen time and again how many politicians (mostly these days, republicans, of course) seem to have scandals, sometimes repeatedly, and stay in power, and others trip once and they're gone.

ted kennedy's career survived many scandals that would have ruined lessers, but the kennedys WERE power, so he stayed. might have kept him out of the white house, but he was the lion of the senate.

the reson weiner's scandal gets him out but shrub, cheney, and so many other republicans are immune? because they have FAR more power than weiner. he pissed off the wrong people and they screwed him.

that is all.



so does this country need to get over some uptight sexual attititudes, particularly regarding public figures? sure, of course, but that's completely besides the point.

what this country needs is to have a massive POWER SHIFT back to the center so that republicans aren't practically immune from scandal despite many far worse transgressions and crimes simply by virtue of being aligned with the right wing.

[brooklynite]

30. Weiner lost because he lied about what he got caught in

Setting aside the debate about whether what he did came with his wife's consent, which is an integral part of loosening sexual attitudes, the story wouldn't have had the same punch if he hadn't lied for a week about his involvement, which focused attention on the salacious parts of the story far longer than necessary.

[JackRiddler]

37. Absolutely counterfactual.

Craig, Vitter and Ensign demonstrate that one can stick around for months and years after being caught in ACTUAL sex scandals (ones involving real-world sex or solicitation), despite lying about them ceaselessly.

The differences with Weiner are self evident:
a) the underlying scandal was actually NOTHING (except to the sick imagination of the puritan mind)
b) the corporate media made it into SOMETHING (on an incredible scale compared to the Republican scandals)
c) Weiner is leader of the progressive caucus, who just tried to expose REAL conflicts of interest and possibly criminal service to corporate interests by Clarence Thomas, and he was targeted for termination by the Breitbart circle, and therefore he's fair game for the corporate media.

[unblock]

55. exactly! democrats must be saints to survive, while republicans can get away with murder

in some cases, literally.

[brooklynite]

65. They don't need to be saints...

...but lying about what they get caught in and dragging the story out for weeks doesn't help.

[unblock]

89. you still don't get it.

YOU are holding weiner to a far higher standard than that to which republicans are held.



and no, there was NO way for weiner (alone) to make the scandal go away.
do you SERIOUSLY think that his telling the truth -- fessing up to sexting, acknowledging the pics were his, volunteering that he has had chats with 17-year olds, etc., would have made the media go away?

the ONLY way the scandal MIGHT have gone away is if the democratic leadership had closed ranks and defended him and declared it a non-issue. but weiner lacked the power to make anything like that happen. not enough friends in high places.

but vitter could get away with worse, and has.

[brooklynite]

100. YES, because I AM NOT A REPUBLICAN!

David Vitter (the poster boy for bad behavior) committed his sins before 2008.

REPUBLICANS in Louisiana chose to vote for him in 2008 after REPUBLICANS in Congress chose to support him.

In the same year, AMERICANS chose to entrust the Government to DEMOCRATS.

In thinking ahead to 2012, I'd like AMERICANS to do it again. I don't care what REPUBLICANS choose to do.

[brooklynite]

64. Hmm, what OTHER thing do Craig, Vitter and Ensign have in common...

Lack of photographic evidence, which give the media something to fixate on that they know their audience will fixate on.

and by the way, Craig staid in office tainted, and Ensign stayed in office while being investigated, and got out an hour before being kicked out. Legally, Weiner could have done the same thing.

[unblock]

56. democrats are held to a vastly different standard.

republicans can break laws, cheat on their spouses, and lie about it with impunity.

meanwhile, democrats who flirt and then lie to try to keep their private life private are forced to resign.

if this doesn't suggest to you that it's all about power rather than the scandal itself, you're really missing the big picture.



GIVEN the higher standard to which democrats are held, did weiner make some serious mistakes? sure.
but the point is that republicans can do FAR worse and be fine.

[sabrina 1]

91. If it is the lies, how come the far more egregious lies of

Clarence Thomas exposed during the same time frame as this, have received zero comment from Democratic leaders?

The media spent 17% of its news coverage on a sex 'scandal' and zero on the lies of a SC Justice.

So, no, it was not the lies, it WAS the sex. We are living in the Victorian era. Actually the American people supported him, so I guess it's the media and the Democratic Party who are stuck back in the Victorian Era.

[CakeGrrl]

22. I don't care WHAT he was doing; it was stupid to distract from the national debate.

What he did should be between him and his wife.

His recklessness, and perhaps the arrogance that spawned that recklessness, caused him to slip up in a way that it gave the MSM the distraction it desperately wants to keep heat off of Republicans whenever possible.

If he stayed, the MSM wouldn't ever let it go...just as whenever they mention Chandra Levy, they MUST ABSOLUTELY mention her association with Gary Condit. Meanwhile, "Morning Joe" Scarborough, who actually had a young woman found dead in his office, carries on as if that never happened.

Dems cannot, by virtue of the contamination of Corporate media ownership, enjoy the hands-off treatment of their transgressions. And Weiner, with his ironically close association to the Clintons, should have known that as well as anyone.

I find it hard to believe that the state of NY cannot come up with a Dem who can put up a comparable voting record.

[JackRiddler]

40. What "national debate"? It's never anything BUT distraction, and that has nothing to do with Weiner.

Media assigns false importance to some trivial shit and then you complain not about the media but about the trivial shit?!

[CakeGrrl]

48. "Contamination of Corporate media ownership", I said

the MSM bias IS my point, as I put out the examples to back up. That's why Morning Joe can cruise along and a lot of the country would be STUNNED to know about Lori Klausutis, while you can't say Gary Condit's name without people remembering Chandra Levy.

Given this ridiculous bias, a Dem can't/shouldn't take the risk of getting caught. The MSM drops anything of substance to focus on it with a laser beam.

[JackRiddler]

33. Your presumption seems to be that an exchange of pixels via electronic media, among people who...

have not even met each other in real life, will have a "victim" until proven otherwise. Your further presumption is that the victimizer in this situation will be the male.

It is indeed a standard of prudery and repression to think anything of the sort.

These were voluntary communications. No evidence of stalking or of unsolicited communications has been brought forward.

They were ONLY communications -- no real-world contacts seem to have occurred.

Therefore it is absurd to presume anyone was victimized. That is an assertion that requires proof, not the other way around.

It takes a very feverish imagination (or sheer opportunism) to assign the importance to these exchanges that the corporate media, the right wing and now you have given to them.

[Skidmore]

36. So he had a digital

erection goin' on there. It wasn't real. Just pixels.

[JackRiddler]

39. So his erection is a criminal state? I figured this was what you'd think.

Presumably his boner was real. I don't care. Pixels are also real. They are, in this case, the only thing that was literally exchanged: Digital pictures of things that may or may not have been real, among consenting parties who were enjoying it as a game, who were hundreds or thousands of miles apart, who had never even met in real (non-electronic) life. (Not that it would necessarily be wrong if they had met in real life, assuming they were still consenting adults and depending on what arrangement Weiner may have had with his wife, which is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS if they don't want to tell us.)

Now you arrive to tell us how this pixel exchange is some kind of coercion, and thus trivialize the very concept of coercion.

[KittyWampus]

72. Simply put, I expect Congressmen using their twitter account under their name Representative W. NOT

to take advantage of their followers by trolling for the hot chicks. Especially if that twitter account is used for discussing that Representatives Congressional activities.

[femrap]

35. Technology has certainly

enabled new ways to behave sexually. Back in my day, Anthony W. would have had to put on a raincoat, hit the street, and flashed.

I regard his behavior as perverted....certainly in no way 'liberated.' The mainstreaming of pronography has pushed the envelope very far...taking us back to objectifying women and with increased violence. Pandora's box was opened and we see the results.

The fact that Anthony W. is recently married and his wife is pregnant shows such a lack of respect for those he supposedly cares for. What a sense of betrayal his wife must feel.

I might add that many of the younger DUers have no idea of what took place in the 1960's and 1970's regarding The Women's Movement and Sexual Liberation. Those I have encountered here have little curiosity about The Women's Movement. Personally, I think pronography has desensitized many.

The New York Times Magazine had an expose on how pron was affecting young men. College dudes were telling counselors that 'real women are just bad pron stars.'

To be frank, I simply can not comprehend how a 46 year-old, married Congressman can think he would get away with this. The Self-Entitlement of this man must be grandiose.

And I am still in complete horror that Vitter is still an U.S. Senator and that he welcomed back to the Senate w/ a standing ovation by the repugnants. This dude gets off sexually by being diapered and soiling himself. It just flabbergasts me. There is no shame in this culture anymore....NONE.

Thank you for such a good post.

[JackRiddler]

44. Your text has some gaping contradictions in it...

Skidmore writes:

Even some behaviors among consenting adults is not. In that category, I would fit the fantasy behavior of that couple in Germany who did the cannibal/dinner menu bit a few years ago. I also include pedophilia, incest, rape, sexual torture, and human trafficking for sexual exploitation.

Nothing on that list is behavior among consenting adults. All are by definition not among adults or non-consenting.

It's rather gross to see these find entry to a discussion about people who have never met exchanging (legal) pictures consensually via the Internet.

[KittyWampus]

71. Okay- Exhibitionism. If you're getting your kinks on in a club for that behavior, fine.

If you're using your Congressional title, office and twitter account where the public is following your professional activities to get your jollies, sorry.

[Lance_Boyle]

78. Au contraire!

Specifically the "sexual torture" bit. S&M between consenting adults is not problematic behavior. If you don't like it, don't consent to it and all's well. But stay out of the bedrooms and pants of those that do. "Consenting" is the key word here. Among adults, it has a specific meaning. It's not your place - or any government's - to deny that meaning.

[devilgrrl]

73. The only place LEFT in the United States is Democratic Underground

The rest of the country is a bunch right wing assholes.

[Skidmore]

76. Some people see DU to the right of some of the crazy Rs apparently.

[JohnnyLib2]

75. Odd thought: what if I get a topless tweet from Bachman in her office?

Or nekkid Newt, for that matter.

[Skidmore]

95. First of all, that tops creepy and the ick scale.

[JohnnyLib2]

97. and not "liberated" in my book.

[femrap]

98. Now

the word, Liberation/Liberated is going to be misconstrued regarding women. Liberation was about being able to have relationships with a man of her choosing. Finally sexual intercourse could be enjoyed without laying there worried about pregnancy.

The biggest development to change the world was the Birth Control Pill. Many men hate it. They somehow feel it took their power away.

Liberation is NOT about 'girls gone wild' nor is it about 'It's my choice to wear 4" stiletto heels.'

I just hate our culture and what it has done to young women. I'm so glad I grew up in '60's and we were taught that the mind is the best sexual organ of the body. And the body is something to treat with respect...not to be treated as the only thing a woman has to offer. And I am so sick of hearing da boyz saying, 'She's hot.' 'I'd hit that.'

It seems the only acceptable models on this planet for women are: Victoria Secret or in a burqa.

[seabeyond]

113. victoria secret is another perfect example.

the companies whole intent was to sexually empower women. it was all about women. addressed the women.

mid 90's it started talking to the man. see this woman with her tits hanging out, are you all hot... now, have your woman buy this garment so you can fantasize this. it was no longer about the womans sexualality. it became about the mans sexuality, using the women.

[JDPriestly]

79. Here is the problem: where do you draw the line?

And perhaps it would be easier for victims of harassment and rape to speak out if the onus on talking about and admitting to sexual aggression were not so common.

Fact is that sexual aggression is an unhealthy manifestation of a very healthy aspect of human life and personality.

When people are well adjusted sexually, they can defend themselves, even protect themselves (although not always) from sexual aggression.

Our society makes a joke of sexual feelings. Tee. Hee. Hee. It's all about shame or showing off and not enough about responsibility for a very natural part of our lives.

So, that is why I ridicule people who superficially attack the behavior of Weiner. Fact is, that the jokes about sex, some more obvious than others abound in our society. Sexual aggression is the norm in the media and nowhere more obviously than on Fox TV shows.

So, why pick on Weiner? Because he is on the left and doesn't raise a lot of money for Democrats. Credits to Randi Rhodes for pointing out the money angle in this.

We need to work on our societal attitudes about sex. We started that work in the 1960s -- and where are we now? Purity balls. Why not celebrate responsibility and respecting others' needs rather than "purity," whatever that is?

We have so many divorces, and many of them are due to couples' problems about sex. This problem is huge in our society. It takes its toll on everybody, young and old.

The real problem is that too many of us don't enter into honest relationships in the first place. I take solace in the knowledge that women can express themselves more freely now than we could in the 1950s. It is a gradual process.

Forcing a good liberal like Weiner out of the House is not a step in the right direction.

[RandomThoughts]

80. The action as you mention it is a mistake.

And it is seen that way, the rifle but to the chin is not the effect, it is a step on the path to proper correction.

It has been seen.



Brothers in Arms - Dire Straits
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5JkHBC5lDs

Bonnie Raitt - I Can't Make You Love Me
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW9Cu6GYqxo

Bonnie Raitt - Nick Of Time
http://www.123video.nl/playvideos.asp?MovieID=407128

Dire Straits - Walk of Life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZxVC0GB838


Constantine - Bring me to life (Evanescence)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dx8d3K_hngw

[femrap]

96. You see 'purity

balls' and I see billions and billions of $$$$$ made in the pron industry. Is there moderation anywhere?

And the butt of all the jokes...teehee is women...the sex class. Patriarchy sucks.

Now, sex kills. AIDS. I grew up in the day where one could get a shot of penicillin and no more worries. Abortion? Today if you are poor and rural, forget about it.

Date rape today....no such thing when I grew up. College dudes rather sit in front of their computers because 'real girls are just bad pron stars.'

I don't see our culture becoming more responsible regarding sexual relationships. That stopped in 1980.

It's a Backlash against women. And the word, clitoris, is still never said. Geez.

ETA: and what's up w/ your avatar? He had to have a son...Elizabeth was post-menopausal and endured hormone treatments. However, a daughter was born. So more treatments. At last. Karma that his mistress had a daughter as well.

[seabeyond]

101. you are so right on. the hypocrisy s amazing. if you do not cheer this adolescent behavior must be

repressed.

are they really now proclaiming that cannot have a satisfactory, good sex life without porn. yup, that is what duers are saying. yet

i have seen the line draw from the very same people and the judgment when a man puts his 13 yr old daughters face on a porn body. sick they cry. puritanical? i would say. pearl clutcher, yup. no law broken. what is the problem?

(it is really hard to type with 2 glasses of wine. i am so easy... lol)

[femrap]

109. I think women are

worse off now than we were in the 1950's...culturally speaking. Music didn't call us bitches and want to pimp us out. There was some restraint...Shame was still alive.

Women are more objectified now than back then. I look at 'risque' photos of Marilyn Monroe and they were so innocent. I'll never forget when some dude brought a 'Hustler' magazine to my place. I nearly threw up. I set it on fire in the kitchen sink.

Now, pron is all about DP and demeaning cum in the face....things that women should never have to think about. There is a disconnect....women are NO LONGER human beings. Women are for pleasure and sex....oh, and VIOLENCE.

I detest our 'culture.'

:toast: I think I'll go get a glass myself!!!

[seabeyond]

110. i agree with you. nt

[femrap]

111. You're on glass #3, aren't you????

:rofl: :rofl:

I have to catch up. I wish I could go back and live in the '60's and early to mid-'70's.

We, the guys and the gals, had FUN. No one was demeaned. There was an intention of understanding and curiosity. We listened to 'Revolution' by The Beatles. The young women didn't wear make-up, nor spend time dying and curling their hair. What was inside was more important than what was on the outside.

We smoked pot and laughed and laughed and laughed. Date rape never entered our minds. We took care of each other. We made a difference.

OK...I really need a drink....because I have no Mary Jane. Damn.

Until they bring back the Draft, nothing will change.

[seabeyond]

112. i was in calif. bishop, mammonth area. we would all strip down and hit the hot springs

or the pools. it was a bunch of clothed boys yelling taking it off, take it off. we all took it off and played....

it was a time where we were on the footing of neither being dominant. the guys would be all over the one guy that tried crude and vulgar. just wasnt allowed.

i know. the kids today are clueless what they are missing. instead they sit in front of a computer and jack off. or dont want to bother with sex. recent studies more kids dont even want to mess with sex.

[JDPriestly]

107. You may be correct about 1980, but don't blame it all on men.

I am a woman, but many women don't want to deal with the reality of sexuality, and that is a shame.

I can't judge the porn industry. I think that more research is needed to determine whether it is harmful, just the result of natural curiosity or interest. I don't really know. I haven't seen any persuasive studies on this.

I do know for a fact that a lot of married couples do not communicate will about sexual matters, and that it is common for sex to become a way for one or the other partner to exert control.

Our high divorce rate is evidence of sexual malaise in the country.

I think that people expect far more from relationships than they can offer and don't really understand the wonderful benefits that a long term, trusting relationship in which the partners accept each other can offer. That's the shame of it all.

The sexual problems from silly tweets and endless innuendo in sitcoms to rape are a symptom of a societal maladjustment or lack of honesty, not a cause. And then, of course, we are delighted when some poor sucker gets caught up in it and makes a total fool of him- or herself and ruins his or her life because of it.

John Edwards is an excellent example of someone who ruined his life over what appears to have been a sexual thrill. I have a lot of compassion for him. I think he would otherwise have been a good president, better than Obama on economic issues, and I keep his avatar because I wish him well. He has a family in spite of his serious mistakes.

Schwarzenegger did exactly the same thing as John Edwards and was never outed.

[femrap]

108. Do

you ever read IBlamethepatriarchy.com?

And Arnold was just outed. He will be divorced. One of his children has changed his last name to Shriver.

The amount of self-entitlement that rich white dudes and the not-so-rich throw around simply turns my eyes to saucers.

Do you have compassion for the children who lost their mother? Or just their father? My jaw has dropped.

I think sexuality smacks women in the face every day...they are forced to deal with daily sexual messages. You are a Madonna or you are a whore....take your pick, bitch.

Numerous studies on pron have been done. There's a prof at UT-Austin who is world known. So I'm not buying that excuse.

I'm sorry but when you tell me not to blame ALL men....I begin to wonder about the programming you have endured.

Again...go check out the above web site.

[Zanzoobar]

103. I don't think this has much to do with sex at all

It has to do with stupid.

On edit:

Every person knows that every other person walks around in their house naked at some time or another.

When your neighbor starts picking up his newspaper in the buff, trouble starts.

Weiner is simply an idiot.

[woo me with science]

106. If you do not wish to talk to someone online, stop typing. nt

[Withywindle]

115. I'm wondering what's up with the reaction over the vibrator ad.

Women (and some men) have been using vibrators for decades - completely safe sexuality, a way to learn about one's body and how to please oneself, just sheer enjoyment without guilt or recrimination or risk, very body-affirming....and some people are having a very intense negative reaction to this. (I think the thing looks more like an electric toothbrush than anything specifically sexual.)

Do people REALLY find this more disturbing than the dying calf picture? Why? I cannot wrap my brain around it.

[Maru Kitteh]

117. I am SO glad I use adblock so I don't have to see the dying baby cow. :-(

That does sound VERY disturbing. Poor baby. :-(

[Withywindle]

118. It's frickin' awful.

But THAT wasn't what started multiple GD threads of ~outrage.

[JoeyT]

121. While I agree that there needs to be a conversation about consent.

And that in the end we're going to need a lot of social pressure to change the ideas many people have around consent, the "Eek! A picture of a penis!" crowd probably won't be of much use in that conversation. Going from "Sex is improper for an elected official!" to "It's the lying, not the sex!" to "A seventeen year old!" to "It isn't about sex or lying or a seventeen year old, now it's about consent!" kind of makes them seem untrustworthy.

Consent should always be a concern, not just when it lets people steer away from their prior much weaker arguments.

[Withywindle]

125. Consent is the number one most important issue to be discussed in any talk about sex.

That's the dividing line between sex and rape, after all.


But consent is more complicated than it seems. How consent is defined. Who is qualified to give consent. These are things that feminists and progressives don't necessarily agree on or understand in the same way!
And of course these issues are very emotionally loaded, so discussing them dispassionately isn't appropriate. Accepting the emotions involved IS appropriate, and continuing to have the discussion anyway.