There was no power dynamic.
If there’s a large age differential for a girl at that age, there is always a power dynamic.
Not a single accusation, rumor, hint of impropriety from an employee, coworker or applicant has ever surfaced. A man’s character everywhere else does not change when on a date.
Yea….it can. Lots of people have a public face and a dark underside that they show only in personal or private settings. Many, if not most family crimes that hit the news include commentary from neighbors along the lines of “he seemed like such a nice person.”
The Nelson and and Johnson accusations include untoward comments and uninvited physical touching.
Then, of course, there is the matter of age. Although relationships between people of those ages was *legal* at the time in Alabama, that doesn’t mean it was common, considered moral, and not creepy.
And from what has been reported so far, no was taken as an answer.
If a man squeezes my ass without asking, and THEN I say no, I am still assaulted. The fact that he respected my “no” after the fact does not change what’s occurred prior.
Have we reached the point in our hysterical criminalizing of relations between men and women that only if an advance is accepted is it then a posteriori acceptable behavior, but if it is rejected, then that classifies it as an assault?
I’m not sure the above situation is “hysterical criminalizing”. A normal guy, in my experience (although that experience was back when dinosaurs roamed the earth) would first try to take my hand or put his arm around me. That’s not assault; I considered it a polite, unspoken inquiry of whether or not further advances would be welcome. If I didn’t want to hold his hand, I made my hand hard to find, and if he was a gentleman,. he took the hint.
Ass grabbing is not a polite, unspoken inquiry. It’s assault.
So how a woman later feels about it determines what classifies the advance and what constitutes a man’s character. Feminists have advanced that test as a determination of what constitutes rape; later regret for agreeing to sex is all it takes.
I agree with you on this point. I don’t get to change my mind afterwards. If I allowed the advance, then I should have to live with it; no ex post facto regrets and certainly not charges.
Are we now in the absurdity that a recollection of a memory of an advance made forty years ago and rejected, with no allegation that the rejection was ignored or forcibly pursued, is forty years later a disqualification for public office?
I agree with you that LEGALLY, due process rights must be respected and followed. That’s why I was glad to see those stupid campus guidelines repealed.
However, MORALLY, before an election, that’s another issue. As a voter, I can decide to wait for a conviction before I change my vote (that’s one choice) OR I can weigh the evidence and the credibility of the accusers, and change my vote accordingly.
Look at how the shoes are changing feet here. Those of us who are repelled by Mrs. Clinton and her behaviors while S of S chose not to vote for her because we found the accusations levied to be credible; those who did vote for her decided that the accusations were not credible OR decided that they would only change their vote if they saw a conviction.
Now, enter Roy Moore. I don’t get a vote here, but what I’ve seen in credible accusations is enough for me to not vote for him if I was an Alabama resident. YMMV, and apparently does.
So where does that leave us? Any man who dares risk taking a date past mere arm’s length conversation has risked his reputation and career far into the future on the future whim of the woman.
Possibly. What I suspect though, is that all male candidates in the future should be prepared to see a lot of old girlfriends they never thought they’d see again. And didn’t want to.
But look at the bright side. Joe Biden has had a long reputation as somebody with wandering hands. :-)