@Suppressed There have been times in my life when I've touched a woman intimately. And I don't ever recall asking for permission.
Have you walked up to strange women and grabbed their genitals? Because that's the issue here, no matter how strenuously you try to deflect.
You sound like these SJWs who want a consent form filled out, when in the real world consent is often granted without a form or verbal request.
Yeah, that's right. My crotch is fair game for any dirty old man who wants to walk up to me and touch it. How dare I get the idea that my private areas are just that, right? Damned feminist SJW!
You know what you sound like? Every contemptible, despicable stereotype put forth by women on the left.
I
f no non-verbal consent was granted, then it was sexual assault. But the only bit of information pro-or-con that we have about consent was that he said that they let him do it. So there's no evidence that he was saying, "I force myself on unconsenting women."
He was bragging that they DO consent!
Then why did Rudy Giuliani, former prosecutor, admit that it was, indeed, sexual assault?
No, I don't assume anything. This is exactly where the difference is. I'm saying we can't assume a specific meaning to what he said, since it's ambiguous. It could have been either.
There's no need to assume anything when his own words are on tape.
On the other hand, you're making the assumption of the worst-case scenario.
I don't have to when I heard what he said on tape.
So it's okay to grab a woman and kiss her without consent, but grabbing the crotch is where the line is drawn? Interesting worldview you have.
Well, first of all, acknowledging that a woman's genitals are not part of the public domain is not a "worldview." It's common decency. Isn't it?
Secondly, I don't know why you would say that's "interesting". Kissing is not sex. And I don't believe most states consider kissing to legally count as sexual assault.
Thirdly, yes, that IS where the line is drawn. Halfway reasonable people understand that. Why don't you?
Yes, intimate areas are required for sexual assault,
If you acknowledge as much, why did you question where the line was drawn?
but that doesn't mean that one can grab a woman off the street and forcibly kiss her (unless it's V-E Day).
Most men wouldn't do it, I expect. But you're trying to deflect again. Kissing is not the issue.
And you left out that he said that he questioned whether Trump had done things.
Of course he said that. How is he. a former prosecutor, going to say, yes, Trump is guilty of those things and I'm going to continue to support him? He had no choice but to admit that the behavior
was sexual assault.
But that would ruin your narrative that Giuliani is claiming Trump admitted to sexual assault. Let's remember, that was your original contention...that Trump had admitted to sexual assault.
No, let's remember that you and maybe a couple of lapdogs in Trump's camp are about the only people in the country twisting yourselves into pretzels to portray Trump as innocent. It's generally acknowledged that yes, Trump did those things---because Trump's words were taken at face value. The only way you can try to justify him is to mischaracterize what he said and add in a healthy dose of "what-ifs."
Won't work.
[/b]And I questioned it. He did no such thing. He gave an ambiguous statement that you choose to interpret one way. If there was consent to the touching, it is not sexual abuse (NYS legal term for sexual assault), by statute. (Note, I'm not a lawyer.)
[/quote]
Ambiguous...LOL.
There's no need for interpretation when the words are clear, and Trump's were.
I have to say, I find it really interesting that you're so insistent on defending his actions.
