Big Turk Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Just now, TakeYouToTasker said: Wrong. You aren't talking about the ability to reason. You're actually eschewing the ability to reason. Reasoning would encompass not seeking to build social institutions that run afoul of normal human behavior; seeking to prop up those institutions which would severely disadvantage half the population to the benefit of the other half is not reasonable. The fact that you're unwilling to have a conversation about what is normal behavior, instead seeking to impose your own viewpoint about appropriateness based on your studies of the pathology or criminals by fiat declaration lends itself towards my argument, not yours. If you aren't a lawyer you should definitely look into becoming one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddaryl Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, TuelTime said: No, appropriate or inappropriate behavior is a matter of perspective. This is why women must sign a non-disclosure agreement before they can party with Shady. A non disclosure agreement wil not absolve anyone of unwanted mis behavior, so he will need to wise up on that one. I have to beleive he has been educated on that sicne that fiasco went public Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Well, just coincidentally, the three current NFLNetwork guys mentioned (Marshall Faulk, Ike Taylor and Heath Evans) are three of the very worst personalities on the network. If they all got canned, it would be addition by subtraction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HappyDays Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 This conversation has gotten pretty weird. This is a thread about obvious and blatant sexual harassment IF the allegations are true. Right? No one here is trying to say that the alleged actions of the NFL Network employees are just normal workplace behavior? There are gray areas but not in this case. Right? Tell me I'm not misunderstanding some of you. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, matter2003 said: If you aren't a lawyer you should definitely look into becoming one. I was a lawyer for a period. No crotch grabbing there either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I am sorry I totally, totally disagree. I am a professional. When I am at work I act professional. I don't curse, I don't "sexually pursue" (horrible phrase) people, I don't drink alcohol..... I don't do any number of things that are not appropriate in the work place. That's a fiat declaration, which I reject wholesale. People are not paid to stop being people. They are paid for their work. We do not leave our biological imperatives at home. We do not put ourselves in boxes. We are who we are 100% of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said: Wrong. You aren't talking about the ability to reason. You're actually eschewing the ability to reason. Reasoning would encompass not seeking to build social institutions that run afoul of normal human behavior; seeking to prop up those institutions which would severely disadvantage half the population to the benefit of the other half is not reasonable. The fact that you're unwilling to have a conversation about what is normal behavior, instead seeking to impose your own viewpoint about appropriateness based on your studies of the pathology or criminals by fiat declaration lends itself towards my argument, not yours. Such sweeping generalizations. Please be more specific as to what social institutions run afoul of normal human behavior and in what way? I am certainly willing to have a conversation. I am not trying to impose my viewpoint, merely expressing it - with no more aggressiveness that you show in yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 2 minutes ago, Buftex said: Well, just coincidentally, the three current NFLNetwork guys mentioned (Marshall Faulk, Ike Taylor and Heath Evans) are three of the very worst personalities on the network. If they all got canned, it would be addition by subtraction... Yea..... Interestingly enough even before I read the allegations whenever Ike's face came onto my TV "penis" was the word that sprung to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Just now, billsfan1959 said: Such sweeping generalizations. Please be more specific as to what social institutions run afoul of normal human behavior and in what way? I am certainly willing to have a conversation. I am not trying to impose my viewpoint, merely expressing it - with no more aggressiveness that you show in yours. Any convention imposed by third wave feminism or transgender rights movements run counter to nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Just now, HappyDays said: This conversation has gotten pretty weird. This is a thread about obvious and blatant sexual harassment IF the allegations are true. Right? No one here is trying to say that the alleged actions of the NFL Network employees are just normal workplace behavior? There are gray areas but not in this case. Right? Tell me I'm not misunderstanding some of you. It certainly seems there are posters that want to confuse the real issues Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said: That's a fiat declaration, which I reject wholesale. People are not paid to stop being people. They are paid for their work. We do not leave our biological imperatives at home. We do not put ourselves in boxes. We are who we are 100% of the time. Well I definitely have a professional persona that is not the same as I am in the pub, even if that is with work colleagues, or when I am at home or with my friends. So I must be a freak of nature or your theory fails. It is just having the ability to control and moderate one's behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, HappyDays said: This conversation has gotten pretty weird. This is a thread about obvious and blatant sexual harassment IF the allegations are true. Right? No one here is trying to say that the alleged actions of the NFL Network employees are just normal workplace behavior? There are gray areas but not in this case. Right? Tell me I'm not misunderstanding some of you. Not at all... the problem is that "allegations" too often are being treated as fact by companies without sufficiently investigating the truth of them with real consequences to people. And if you don't think women will make stuff up for no reason...well, just think how often a woman will make up a reason to not go out with a guy that is a complete lie...now imagine if a bunch of money was involved.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Bomb Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I was a lawyer for a period. No crotch grabbing there either. Most ppl don't have white collar careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Just now, GunnerBill said: Well I definitely have a professional persona that is not the same as I am in the pub, even if that is with work colleagues, or when I am at home or with my friends. So I must be a freak of nature or your theory fails. It is just having the ability to control and moderate one's behaviour. No, you're simply making a personal choice to moderate your own behavior based on your own preferences. That's your choice. However, that doesn't mean individuals making a different choice, and acting on normal human biological impulses which don't violate someone's rights are wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 5 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I was a lawyer for a period. No crotch grabbing there either. Yeah, I don't doubt that...lawyers are definitely pretty tightly wound...although I can't count the number of ones I've seen snorting coke at an after party tho... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billsfan1959 Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 4 minutes ago, TakeYouToTasker said: That's a fiat declaration, which I reject wholesale. People are not paid to stop being people. They are paid for their work. We do not leave our biological imperatives at home. We do not put ourselves in boxes. We are who we are 100% of the time. You are correct, we are who we are 100% of the time. What we do not do is manifest, behaviorally, 100% of who we are 100% of the time. Which is not really a nuanced distinction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaviorPeterman Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 For those that aren't sheep and are paying close attention, I hope you understand what the elites and liberals are doing here pushing this BS 'Sexual Harassment' narrative to the forefront in recent weeks. Obviously the Russia collusion story is going nowhere despite the recent arrests and charges against Trump campaign members (the charges have nothing to do with Trump or his campaign BTW) so this was 'Plan B' all along. And liberals have no problem sacrificing their own (i.e. Weinstein, Al Franken, etc) to set the stage for 2020 when they run another female candidate against Trump and push the gender card to the forefront again even though they failed miserably with Crooked Hillary. Same reason all the BS sexual accusations against Trump are magically in the news again and you see his 'victims' sob stories as if they are 'new' allegations. It's pretty sad the lengths Democrats (and some Republicans) are going to go to try and stop this guy because he's not one of them and never will be. And even when Trump wins by a larger margin in 2020 they'll still find new ways to waste taxpayer money and continue their futile efforts. These are truly sick people folks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-Bomb Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 3 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Well I definitely have a professional persona that is not the same as I am in the pub, even if that is with work colleagues, or when I am at home or with my friends. So I must be a freak of nature or your theory fails. It is just having the ability to control and moderate one's behaviour. Not everyone is a Puritan either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBill Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 1 minute ago, TakeYouToTasker said: However, that doesn't mean individuals making a different choice, and acting on normal human biological impulses which don't violate someone's rights are wrong. But we are talking about when they do violate someone's rights..... like sticking a hand down their trousers to check if they are wearing underwear..... 1 minute ago, T-Bomb said: Not everyone is a Puritan either... I don't want them to be. Just professional. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Turk Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 Just now, T-Bomb said: Not everyone is a Puritan either... Don't tell that to all the people doing the Salem Witch Hunt on sexual harrssment these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts