Dear Democrats (and everyone else) calling on Sen. Franken to resign:

[TygrBright]

Fine. Okay. If you place that level of importance on protecting the integrity of government and ensuring that our elected officials have not committed sexual improprieties, I get it.

Personally, I'd like to see a little more information about the alleged offenses, but you may be seeing stuff I'm not seeing. I'll take you at your words. But in that case:

YOU'D DAMN' WELL BETTER BE CALLING JUST AS LOUDLY AND URGENTLY FOR >REDACTED< TO RESIGN IMMEDIATELY, FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON.

Because if it's wrong for a Senator, it's sure as hell wrong for a President, and I expect to see y'all spending at least the same amount of energy, effort, and political capital on ridding us of the serial skeever at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue.

If you don't, I'm more than entitled to write you off as bandwagon-jumping, opportunistic political hypocrites willing to make any gesture that costs you nothing, and support your primary opponents in the next election.

Capish?

I'm waiting.

impatiently,
Bright

[msongs]

1. the anti franken crowd is silent when it comes to trump. one wonders why. nt

[kcr]

6. I suspect many will be equally as silent when their own ox is gored

And it's bound to happen. The one thing I can't get over is how awfully short-sighted this is. So, we're supposed to be the bigger party and immediately demand resignation. So, we're going to do this each and every time? I have a hard time believing that. No one calling for Franken's resignation is thinking this through. What happens the next time? And the time after that? Eventually, we'll have to slow down and actually, you know, investigate, because the damage will be too great otherwise. Whoops.

[dragonlady]

9. The damage this time

is too great to go ahead without thorough investigation, which I believe would come out 99% in Al's favor. But apparently spines are too weak to wait for that.

[Kimchijeon]

17. No question, an investigation would be in Al's favor

Oh dear, we can't have that, commence with the lynch mob! Idiots!

[ananda]

11. Russian/rightwing trolls probably.

nt

[ProudLib72]

2. 100% AGREED

[CaliforniaPeggy]

3. I'm with you, my dear TygrBright! n/t

[librechik]

4. Franken must call for the same from Trump. That should be his message.

Otherwise why do it? Make them prove it and then kick you out.

Trump must do what Franken does. He won't, but it's a better moral place to stand than we have now.

[Phoenix61]

5. Right there with you Bright

But I don't think they will.

[mopinko]

7. and if moore wins, they better slice and dice him but good.

if they arent ready to do that, fuck them.

[Tipperary]

8. I so agree. Why are these senators letting Dotard go on his merry way?

But they want to get rid of Franken. We eat our own it seems.

[ffr]

10. Get thee to the Greatest thread!

Exactly. Why the stand now, at this juncture and critical moment when we need all hands on deck and he's doing the heavy lifting!!!

[DFW]

12. I hope his FB account and office email is FLOODED with do NOT resign messages

He has mine, anyway.

You can be sure the Trump-O'Keefe-Bannon crowd is sending him a few hundred thousand robo "RESIGN!" messages, so whatcha waiting for?

[jalan48]

13. Good post. nt

[samnsara]

14. text RESIST to 50409 to send a free fax to your Senators...Mine....

...true blue Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray today supported his resignation. I'm going to send them a fax to tell them that many in the Dem Party don't believe the allegations to be serious enuff for resignation and telling them they now have to call for Trumps impeachment with the same loud voice.

[charliea]

15. Excuse me, but another harasser is unmentioned

Conyers retired after 52 years 11 months because he spent 27k of our money to settle a harassment complaint. Who else paid settlement money? Congressman Farenthold spent 87K, and I hear no chorus of condemnation being directed at him. Franken never paid anyone off and he called for an investigation into himself, Tweeden accepted his apology, so why isn't Farenthold also a target of opprobrium? IOKIYAR? (bullpucky)

[LovingA2andMI]

27. Excuse Moi....

But Conyers admitted to NOTHING but #Resigned. Meanwhile, Al Franken did admit and his still in his seat. #JustTheFacts

[Jarqui]

16. I'm still troubled.

I read this
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/i-believe-frankens-accusers-because-he-groped-me-too/547691/?utm_source=twb#article-comments

Then I saw Al Franken. I only bug celebrities for pictures when it’ll make my foster mom happy. She loves Franken, so I asked to get a picture with him. We posed for the shot. He immediately put his hand on my waist, grabbing a handful of flesh. I froze. Then he squeezed. At least twice.

He "grabbed" her waist during a photo (her alleged perception) and this is a big sex crime?

The account provided by the first woman who came forward has not stood up well to scrutiny - by the facts.

I've really appreciated Sen Franken. I'm troubled that his efforts are being diminished by suspect or unconvincing allegations. If he's truly been up to no good, I do not have a problem accepting he must resign but I'd like some solid/better evidence of that before he resigns.

[Bengus81]

19. Here's the picture of them..........

This is groping and abuse on Franken's part like SHE claims?? BS

[Jarqui]

21. How come she isn't grimacing from him grabbing her waist in way

that she wouldn't allow her husband?

Why is there no account of him getting his face slapped or punched for putting his hands on a woman?

They all look happy to be with him in a photo - not like they're getting their pussy grabbed - like some of the expressions we see on Trump's women - including Melania.

I need real evidence.

[Ms. Toad]

24. The expression on a woman's face means NOTHING.

I was in a nearly identical situation - with a choice between making a scene among mutual friends when one of them fondled my buttocks.

To this day only one in the small group of fewer than a dozen, and none in the group of somewhere between 100 and 1000 who were within sight, know - and that person only knows because I told them aproximately 18 months later when it became relevant.

This crap is the equivalent of, "Look at her, she could not possibly have been raped because she's not acting like a proper rape victim," from the 70s. That reason for casting aspersions on the claims against Franken is misogynistic.

[Jarqui]

25. I do not agree

It is possible that as you claim: in the social circumstance, a victim did not want to make a scene and was able to act their way through it.

But it is also possible that they went through the motions without as joyful an expression - which gets them through the situation but you can see something in their expression. And it's also possible they slap him in the face.

I'm not seeing solid evidence of either of the latter two in any of these 7 encounters. When there are that many, it is not misogynistic to note it. Different people can react differently. The more incidents without any deviation in reaction, the less likely it's really happening. Again, that is not a misogynistic conclusion - it's closer to being based on probability and statistics - some reasoning.

[Ms. Toad]

28. I'm pretty sure I have not only experienced more hassment than you,

but also have dealt with more survivors than you - since the latter number runs into the hundreds. The only predictable response to sexual abuse or rape is that it is unpredictable.

Casting doubt on the veracity of the complaint based on a facial expression, whether it was reported immediately - or later - or not at all, whether her emotional affect changed, or whether anyone present - or with her later noticed anything different is classic 1970s (or earlier) misogyny.

As for your, "Gee, someone would have made a scene," how many years was Weinstein at it -with far worse - with no one making a scene? Laurer? Serial abusers are generally very good at what they do - including being very good at picking (1) womone who won't make a scene (2) women no one will believe, etc.

[Jarqui]

30. Comparing Franken to Weinstein is night and day

Weinstein wielded his power over careers to shut people up. Ditto to a lesser extent for Lauer. And they used it.

What control over a career did Franken have over this woman who joined him for a photo? None. They were strangers. She was just a casual encounter. She could have slapped his face, sued him, called the cops, etc - right then and there. A bunch of the women Weinstein or Lauer assaulted didn't have the same option - because their careers could be directly ruined in the background. That's not misogyny to note that - it is a fundamental, material fact of the differences in their circumstances. And i'm simply not letting you hide behind the skirt of misogyny when I point it out.

There is no contempt, hatred or prejudice against women (misogyny) when I make that observation because I can and would make the same point for males in similar positions.

Now, a minority would want to experience a social incident in the above circumstances. A majority would elect in the shock of the circumstances to avoid an embarrassing situation. I get that. I would be and have been no different many of those times. But there have been moments where I reacted on the spot and let someone know where to get off. The higher the number of incidents without a different outcome - particularly where Franken lacked the control over a person like Weinstein had, then the chances of it being a real problem are diminished. That's not misogyny - it's basic reasoning.

[Ms. Toad]

31. It is night and day - and there would be even more reason for outcry

over their indiscretions because they were so much more significant. Weighed against the power differential, it would take a more significant act to overcome the power.

Similarly, as to the power relationship, you are underestimating the power of celebrity/political status, and the obviously transient nature of the encounter - and the societal pressure against disclosing sexual harassment. All those mitigate toward tolerating the momentary trespass, extracting onesself, and staying away from such encounters with that person in the future.

Virtually no one chooses to invite the kind of character assassination that has been heaped on Franken's accusers for relatively minor transgressions.

What you are calling basic reasoning is based in the misogynistic expectation that targets of sexual harassment will act in a certain way, and when they don't - or not enough of them do - you "reason" that the harassment must not have occurred.

[Jarqui]

32. This is a strawman and not what I have claimed:

What you are calling basic reasoning is based in the misogynistic expectation that targets of sexual harassment will act in a certain way, and when they don't - or not enough of them do - you "reason" that the harassment must not have occurred.

a) it is not a misogynistic expectation because I maintained (above) my position whether the assault/indiscretion was (to state even more explicitly) male to male, male to female, female to male or female to female. In all of those various circumstances, people have a tendency to avoid an embarrassing/awkward social situation. Regardless of your wishful thinking, women do not have a monopoly on those emotions/reactions in those circumstances. Those reactions are human - experienced by either sex. Therefore, trying to pin misogyny on this is desperate, irrational nonsense - or prejudicial against men.

b) I do not reason that "that the harassment must nothave occurred". I reason that as the number of incidents increase, if there is no deviation in the reactions - if we see no reaction in the photos, no complaint to the police, no face slap, etc, harassment is less likely to have occurred. That is not the same thing as "must not" with a probability of zero. It means that it is less likely - the probability is less.

[Ms. Toad]

36. Whether you call it zero - or near zero - it is the same thing.

You are casting doubt on specific accusers because, as a whole, they are not behaving in a manner you expect them to behave.

As to your first point - the primary dynamic, even (or perhaps especially) when the victim is male is that the victim is being treated as a woman - being put in '"her" place (even when she is a he). The vast majority of male rape survivors at some point express concern that they were targeted because they were gay/effeminate/not enough of a man. All of that has roots in misogyny, regardless of the gender of either victim or abuser.

[Jarqui]

38. I did not say "near zero" you're making that up

But ask your math professor if zero or "near zero" are the same thing. I think he'll agree with me that they are not.

I am casting doubt on Franken's accusers because they may be behaving the way someone in the GOP wants them to behave.

As for this:

As to your first point - the primary dynamic, even (or perhaps especially) when the victim is male is that the victim is being treated as a woman - being put in '"her" place (even when she is a he). The vast majority of male rape survivors at some point express concern that they were targeted because they were gay/effeminate/not enough of a man. All of that has roots in misogyny, regardless of the gender of either victim or abuser.

In the article I linked above:
"For example, of juveniles reporting staff sexual misconduct, 89 percent were boys reporting abuse by a female staff member."
So are all of those cases of females with penis envy? I sincerely doubt it. And these are just boys as victims - they have not fully identified with being men yet.

or google images for "female teachers sexual assault"
https://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1094&bih=478&ei=16woWu31LI_mjwT0kLCACg&q=female+teachers+sexual+assault&oq=female+teachers+sexual+assault&gs_l=img.3...3916.14808.0.15097.32.17.1.14.14.0.181.1962.4j12.16.0....0...1ac.1.64.img..1.22.1847...0j0i30k1j0i5i30k1j0i8i30k1.0.H-mgR-T7CmM

How does your theory on misogyny ("when the victim is male is that the victim is being treated as a woman - being put in '"her" place (even when she is a he)&quot hold up in those cases above? Your theory doesn't hold water in those cases but those males are victims just the same.

[Jarqui]

34. Here's some food for your thoughts on misogyny

When Men Are Raped
A new study reveals that men are often the victims of sexual assault, and women are often the perpetrators.
http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html

Stemple, who works with the Health and Human Rights Project at UCLA, had often wondered whether incidents of sexual violence against men were under-reported. She had once worked on prison reform and knew that jail is a place where sexual violence against men is routine but not counted in the general national statistics. Stemple began digging through existing surveys and discovered that her hunch was correct. The experience of men and women is “a lot closer than any of us would expect,” she says. For some kinds of victimization, men and women have roughly equal experiences. Stemple concluded that we need to “completely rethink our assumptions about sexual victimization,” and especially our fallback model that men are always the perpetrators and women the victims.
....
This definition includes victims who were forced to penetrate someone else with their own body parts, either by physical force or coercion, or when the victim was drunk or high or otherwise unable to consent. When those cases were taken into account, the rates of nonconsensual sexual contact basically equalized, with 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men claiming to be victims of sexual violence.
...
The final outrage in Stemple and Meyer’s paper involves inmates, who aren’t counted in the general statistics at all. In the last few years, the BJS did two studies in adult prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. The surveys were excellent because they afforded lots of privacy and asked questions using very specific, informal, and graphic language. (“Did another inmate use physical force to make you give or receive a blow job?”) Those surveys turned up the opposite of what we generally think is true. Women were more likely to be abused by fellow female inmates, and men by guards, and many of those guards were female. For example, of juveniles reporting staff sexual misconduct, 89 percent were boys reporting abuse by a female staff member. In total, inmates reported an astronomical 900,000 incidents of sexual abuse.

When it comes to sexual assault or harassment, I think you're going to find the skirts of misogyny are no longer safe haven. We are waking up as a society in this area - and not just to the plight of women. This is a very human problem - for males and females.

[Ms. Toad]

35. I don't think I ever said otherwise,

However, the misogyny is perhaps even more emotionally challenging when the victim is male.

Much of the targeting of males (aside form guards in prison) is cast as treating men as women - subjecting them to the power imbalance, helplessness, etc. of the female experience. And it is often far harder for men to come forward because, in addition to the aftermath of sexual assault or rape, they often struggle wtih the shame of being treated as a woman, of fearing that it means they are gay, and - especially with young gay men - guilt at the involuntary physical response that had nothing to do with wanting the encounter.

That doesn't make it not misogyny - because it is very much tangled up with hatred/contempt for women, and forcing men into that subservient role.

[Jarqui]

37. There are some parts I agree with you on but not entirely

I think there is an aspect of animal dominance going on - whether the one being assaulted is male or female and whether the one doing the assault is male or female. We see those terrible statistics of women sexually abusing boys - which defies your suggestion of males just substituting for females. Look at all the female teachers caught sexually abusing their students.

For as much as many women fear coming forward after this has happened to them, the problem seems to be as bad or maybe even worse for men. It may well not be related to a career concern as frequently but may well tie to the old stigma you seem to relate to that males are supposed to be the stronger one and therefore, there is greater shame when the male is overcome and sexually abused. For me, whether male or female, there is some humiliation, some violation and a desire for privacy - things like that going on in both.

Having said that, my outrage for people like Weinstein or Bill Cosby doing this stuff seems limitless. I'd like to see those men behind bars for the rest of their lives. So do not mistake my views as something related to tolerance. There should be zero tolerance and the sooner some of these people wind up severely punished, the sooner society realizes the behavior is truly unacceptable regardless of which sex is involved.

In Al Franken's case, I simply want more evidence. I'm not convinced in his case yet.

[Ms. Toad]

39. I'm fine with not convinced.

My concern is with the attacks on the accusers - using timeworn tactics to dismiss the credibility of victims claims. Those challenges are on a spectrum from, "look, she's smiling" to "look at what she was wearing," and "she had sex with everything that moved" to she's anonymous, or waited too long. All of which amount to, if she's not a nun living in the mother-house, in front of the rest of the nuns, I don't believe her.

[Jarqui]

40. In terms of numbers, on the other side of the coin

when you get 60 accusers like Bill Cosby, those numbers work against Cosby.

A handful could be coerced by the GOP against Franken.

I'm not saying that is what happened. I don't know for sure. I remain open. Franken might be guilty. Might not. Or somewhere in between.

If this goes to court, then you may have to consider some of the things you raised. It depends on the evidence and circumstances as to whether it would be pertinent.

With this particular woman, her alleging Franken grabbing her waist momentarily during a picture - i'm having trouble being sympathetic to sexual assault/harassment there. It seems over the top but I'm open to hearing more to make sure before reaching a final conclusion.

[LadyVV]

18. No! Do not resign, we need you.

[nadine_mn]

20. Every Dem Senator calling for Franken to resign, better be prepared to resign as well

Under similar circumstances - Will Gillibrand, K Harris, etc all be willing to resign if half a dozen anonymous men or women accuse them of similar actions?

No waiting for ethics investigation, no saying it was different because Franken is male.. just hold yourself to the same standard. Anonymous accusations from (some a decade old and/or before you were in office) anyone, unsubstantiated and without any proof - you too should be prepared to resign.

[dalton99a]

33. +1

[Honeycombe8]

22. TRUE, Tygrbright! What's this, "Oh, we don't want to impeach Trump" but "Franken needs to resign"???

WTH? Up is down, and down is up? What upside down situation IS this, anyway?

[triron]

29. Coming in loud and clear and I want to know as well.

This is BULLSHIT with a very bad smell.

[ancianita]

23. Damn right!

[LovingA2andMI]

26. Must Have Missed This Thread.....

Here You Go....

"Justice Demands...

The #Resign or #Retire standard set by the Former Dean of the U.S. House and Former Representative for over 52+ Years, the STILL HONORABLE John Conyers.

Al Franken needs to #Resign or #Retire -- along with Joe Barton, Ruben Kihuen, Blake Farenthold and Donald Trump!

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9935678"