The #MeToo Madness is convulsing America

proconsul

TAG Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Messages
22
Reaction score
27
Has anyone been following the news about the #MeToo movement in the US, and a new wave of prudish norms and accusations suddenly being levelled against people or behaviors that were considered "no big deal" as recently as a few years ago, but are now suddenly cast in a very different light?

What strikes me as particularly astonishing is that the Democrats (i.e. liberals) are now becoming the New Puritans. It used to be that liberal people were relaxed about sexual stuff, but now, if you watch liberal commentators or the liberal mouthpiece CNN, liberals are losing their marbles, as in the following video, where the liberal anchorwoman is railing against... Bill Clinton, of all people, for having had a consensual affair with a 23-year-old woman:



I almost can't believe my eyes. I don't like the direction this is headed in. All of a sudden people are trying to outdo each other in prudishness and Puritanism.

You may have heard that cheerleaders, beauty pageants, and so on may soon be a thing of the past as the #MeToo champions of the Anti-Sex Revolution are now targeting everything that has a sexual subtext, and trying to actively purge it from our life, with an almost Stalinesque zeal.

Some things that we're used to may soon be a relic of history -- and it won't happen at the hands of conservative Republicans, it'll happen at the hands of these Stalinist ultra-feminists/liberals. For instance, nudity in film will be prohibited (now on the grounds of 'objectification of women') and we'll return to the pre-1950s era. Porn, strip clubs, and so on will be banned. We may see a return to Victorianism. Touching a woman for any reason will be prohibited (or perhaps require a written contract).

I'm particularly surprised because the US used to be a right-wing country. If this were happening in Sweden, for example, where you already need to have "Active Consent" for sex, or in Canada, those countries are more likely to undergo feminist revolutions. But the fact that this happening in the US defies logic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sinapse
Beauty pageants are creepy and should be iliminated. Cheer leaders are just stupid. I don’t care one way or another.
 
Has anyone been following the news about the #MeToo movement in the US, and a new wave of prudish norms and accusations suddenly being levelled against people or behaviors that were considered "no big deal" as recently as a few years ago, but are now suddenly cast in a very different light?

What strikes me as particularly astonishing is that the Democrats (i.e. liberals) are now becoming the New Puritans. It used to be that liberal people were relaxed about sexual stuff, but now, if you watch liberal commentators or the liberal mouthpiece CNN, liberals are losing their marbles, as in the following video, where the liberal anchorwoman is railing against... Bill Clinton, of all people, for having had a consensual affair with a 23-year-old woman:



I almost can't believe my eyes. I don't like the direction this is headed in. All of a sudden people are trying to outdo each other in prudishness and Puritanism.

You may have heard that cheerleaders, beauty pageants, and so on may soon be a thing of the past as the #MeToo champions of the Anti-Sex Revolution are now targeting everything that has a sexual subtext, and trying to actively purge it from our life, with an almost Stalinesque zeal.

Some things that we're used to may soon be a relic of history -- and it won't happen at the hands of conservative Republicans, it'll happen at the hands of these Stalinist ultra-feminists/liberals. For instance, nudity in film will be prohibited (now on the grounds of 'objectification of women') and we'll return to the pre-1950s era. Porn, strip clubs, and so on will be banned. We may see a return to Victorianism. Touching a woman for any reason will be prohibited (or perhaps require a written contract).

. If this were happening in Sweden, for example, where you already need to have "Active Consent" for sex, or in Canada, those countries are more likely to undergo feminist revolutions. But the fact that this happening in the US defies logic.


For the record my political position is very strict center. I don't follow the political hype of any party. They are all full of shit. I go with the one that seems to have the least amount of shit at the time.

Are you saying that it's ok for men to act like assholes around women, or that it's ok for a man of power (ie the president of the US) to manipulate a woman more than half his age. Yes she was an adult and she made her decision, but he should have known better. Am I tired of seeing news about #metoo. Absofuckinglutly, but until the men of the world figure out that they shouldn't be dicks to women in the work place we're going to continue to see it.

"Some things that we're used to may soon be a relic of history"
"I'm particularly surprised because the US used to be a right-wing country"

People are afraid of change. This post demonstrates it.

It doesn't matter if the country was right leaning or left leaning. It matters that the country leans the way a majority of the people feel it should lean. If a majority of the people want a more socialist-like government there is nothing wrong with that.

What I don't get is your attitude. It really sucks tbh. Oh know the "Stalinist ultra-feminists/liberals" are destroying the world. Is it wrong for people to fight to help other people? A lot of the "liberals" fights are tend to be for protecting consumers, providing services for people who can't afford it? Is that so wrong? All the while it seems to me like the "right wing" want to do nothing but greedily lower their tax burden, and get in the business of every other person in the country. I don't know that seems pretty wrong to me.

just my US$0.02
 
Has anyone been following the news about the #MeToo movement in the US, and a new wave of prudish norms and accusations suddenly being levelled against people or behaviors that were considered "no big deal" as recently as a few years ago, but are now suddenly cast in a very different light?

What strikes me as particularly astonishing is that the Democrats (i.e. liberals) are now becoming the New Puritans. It used to be that liberal people were relaxed about sexual stuff, but now, if you watch liberal commentators or the liberal mouthpiece CNN, liberals are losing their marbles, as in the following video, where the liberal anchorwoman is railing against... Bill Clinton, of all people, for having had a consensual affair with a 23-year-old woman:



I almost can't believe my eyes. I don't like the direction this is headed in. All of a sudden people are trying to outdo each other in prudishness and Puritanism.

You may have heard that cheerleaders, beauty pageants, and so on may soon be a thing of the past as the #MeToo champions of the Anti-Sex Revolution are now targeting everything that has a sexual subtext, and trying to actively purge it from our life, with an almost Stalinesque zeal.

Some things that we're used to may soon be a relic of history -- and it won't happen at the hands of conservative Republicans, it'll happen at the hands of these Stalinist ultra-feminists/liberals. For instance, nudity in film will be prohibited (now on the grounds of 'objectification of women') and we'll return to the pre-1950s era. Porn, strip clubs, and so on will be banned. We may see a return to Victorianism. Touching a woman for any reason will be prohibited (or perhaps require a written contract).

I'm particularly surprised because the US used to be a right-wing country. If this were happening in Sweden, for example, where you already need to have "Active Consent" for sex, or in Canada, those countries are more likely to undergo feminist revolutions. But the fact that this happening in the US defies logic.


I am generally in support of all of the stuff around #MeToo. A bunch of assholes have been toppled, criticized, fired, arrested or otherwise cast out from society. Great! A few maybe didn't deserve it, but almost all of them did. I don't get where you are coming from. What is happening is completely seperate and distinct from feminism or right/left extreme politics. I dont know why you are trying to make connections that are not there. These are all just normal women who are fed up and have decided to say, "I've had fucking enough!" And now that they have said it, almost unanimously from all corners of enlightened society, everyone is saying back, "Your right! Why have we put up with this horseshit for so long?" Stopping the objectification of women or men or anyone is a good thing. Beauty pageants are fucking creepy. Strip clubs and porn are fine as long as there is consent and they are not being pushed in front of people. Left/Right politics aside, we all agree that someone's freedom ends when he/she causes someone else a problem. You think Weinstein wasn't causing people problems?
 
I am generally in support of all of the stuff around #MeToo. A bunch of assholes have been toppled, criticized, fired, arrested or otherwise cast out from society. Great! A few maybe didn't deserve it, but almost all of them did. I don't get where you are coming from. What is happening is completely seperate and distinct from feminism or right/left extreme politics. I dont know why you are trying to make connections that are not there. These are all just normal women who are fed up and have decided to say, "I've had fucking enough!" And now that they have said it, almost unanimously from all corners of enlightened society, everyone is saying back, "Your right! Why have we put up with this horseshit for so long?" Stopping the objectification of women or men or anyone is a good thing. Beauty pageants are fucking creepy. Strip clubs and porn are fine as long as there is consent and they are not being pushed in front of people. Left/Right politics aside, we all agree that someone's freedom ends when he/she causes someone else a problem. You think Weinstein wasn't causing people problems?
This time I must say I agree with the bad piggy.
 
......................asking not to be sexually harassed is not anti-sex at all. Yikes.
 
Well, except for one thing: there are real courts of justice , and there is the court of opinion. I am not sure going systematically to the latter is always proper or even fair.
l I agree to some extent. Garrison Keillors case was BS. But there is always collateral damage when big earthquake social change happens. In the wrong place at the wrong time.
 
l I agree to some extent. Garrison Keillors case was BS. But there is always collateral damage when big earthquake social change happens. In the wrong place at the wrong time.

Change is scary, and that is what causes so much of the backlash we see, but we can not move forward as a society without change. Staying the same means we are only dooming ourselves.
 
You may have heard that cheerleaders, beauty pageants, and so on may soon be a thing of the past as the #MeToo champions of the Anti-Sex Revolution are now targeting everything that has a sexual subtext, and trying to actively purge it from our life, with an almost Stalinesque zeal.

good. beauty pageants, cheerleaders, all that stuff is weird suppressed bullshit.

If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine.

If you wanna avoid all that stuff, you should also be free to do so, it doesn't need to be in the mainstream.

cheerleaders and beauty pageants are for pussy conservative middle age guys that wanna watch young pretty girls but don't wanna admit that they wanna fuck them.

I guess what Im saying is Im fine with anything with a 'sexual subtext' to be taken out. Why does there have to be a subtext? we are adults in a civilized society. If you wanna do sex stuff, go do it, go to a trip club, bang an escort, get a HE after a massage, jerk off over porn whatever. If you want avoid it, then you should be able too easily avoid it. Its the half-way stuff that offends people. I mean why the fuck are there grid-girls at the Formula 1, or ring girls at the boxing? Its unnecessary and its because a lot of people won't admit to what they really want.
 
good. beauty pageants, cheerleaders, all that stuff is weird suppressed bullshit.

If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine.

If you wanna avoid all that stuff, you should also be free to do so, it doesn't need to be in the mainstream.

cheerleaders and beauty pageants are for pussy conservative middle age guys that wanna watch young pretty girls but don't wanna admit that they wanna fuck them.

I guess what Im saying is Im fine with anything with a 'sexual subtext' to be taken out. Why does there have to be a subtext? we are adults in a civilized society. If you wanna do sex stuff, go do it, go to a trip club, bang an escort, get a HE after a massage, jerk off over porn whatever. If you want avoid it, then you should be able too easily avoid it. Its the half-way stuff that offends people. I mean why the fuck are there grid-girls at the Formula 1, or ring girls at the boxing? Its unnecessary and its because a lot of people won't admit to what they really want.

Hmmm, I see where you come from but don’t forget that nobody force ladies to enter beauty pageants and cheerleaders teams. And many women like those too. If they are doomed by social evolution then so be it , they will disappear silently, no need to censor or forbid them.
But I bet you something else will replace them ... for thousands of years in most civilizations you had this kind of more or less artistic celebration of the female body. I dont see that necessarily as evil. Even the rather repressed muslim world has belly dancing.
 
The US has been defying logic for decades... Just pick a decade.... You see there are always reasons to change for what people think at the time is the "Better".... I'm more disturbed by the "double-standard" that is all too apparent. IMO women are becoming stronger and standing up saying "Hey ! We aren't going to put up with this crap anymore"... Guys that objectify women and use their position in work/society to demean them..well they should be publicly humiliated (unless they paid for that service and it was agreed)... There will always be guys that behave badly. I also believe there are women who also use their charm, flirtations to manipulate men (men do that same - it's not exclusive) At the end of the day... We are Human Beings... Sexual Beings... But having control over your "urges" is part of being an adult... Maybe that's the problem.. people think they can do what they want and not have to pay the consequences of their actions - because of who they are or how much money they have... I'm tired of the people always looking to blame others in their plight in life.. make your own fucking way and accept the responsibility for your decisions (good or bad) and move the fuck on down the road so to speak...
 
So let's say you're a normal guy who does nothing wrong, and you're in a relationship, like US comedian Aziz Ansari. After a consensual sexual relationship, some evil woman who retrospectively didn't like something about the consensual encounter (or something wasn't to her satisfaction) can ruin your life by raising the flag of #MeToo, publicly humiliate you, and accuse you of harassment. Men can't defend themselves in this situation. In the age of Twitter and social media, their lives are ruined. For example, US TV personalities like Matt Lauer, Mike Halperin, etc. never uttered a word in their own defense, even though they never forced themselves on anyone -- they were acting on flirty signals from their girlfriends. Flirtation is a gray area and they certainly aren't random rapists who are strangers to their victims, but nevertheless they quickly self-destructed, and never stood up for themselves. No one else did, either. They were thrown to the wolves for kissing or petting a woman who was in all likelihood flirtatious with them.

Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky? You say the relationship was inappropriate because of "power dynamics?" Hold on, that's what you say now: only a few years ago office romance was commonplace and accepted by everyone as normal. It was absolutely common and typical for older men with status to be both interested in and targeted by younger women. Let's extend this projection to what's going to happen in the future, since we know how cultural norms are shifting: Currently you say a 53-year-old man "immorally seduced" a 23-year-old subordinate (despite everything being 100% consensual and adult); the next iteration of this will be that you'll be protesting against a 53-year-old man dating a 23-year-old woman period, on the grounds of an "immorally big age gap," regardless of whether they even work together. See where I'm going with this? It's an ever-increasing assault on sexual liberty. It'll extend from the workplace to all aspects of life, like it did with Aziz Ansari's private relationship.

And don't be so quick to say "If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine." The feminists are coming next for these very things you've just proposed -- the remaining few things available for sexual recourse. They started with the cheerleaders, the Miss Universe, etc., and purged it of all sexual innuendo. Next, they're going to get to strip clubs, which they'll claim "objectify women" (because, after all, men should be banned from considering women in a sexual light or as sex objects). Likewise they'll get to porn next. We're already living this nightmare in the US -- we had a bill passed, SESTA/FOSTA, which criminalized any discussion of prostitution, forcing the shutdown of Backpage and related sites.
 
So let's say you're a normal guy who does nothing wrong, and you're in a relationship, like US comedian Aziz Ansari. After a consensual sexual relationship, some evil woman who retrospectively didn't like something about the consensual encounter (or something wasn't to her satisfaction) can ruin your life by raising the flag of #MeToo, publicly humiliate you, and accuse you of harassment. Men can't defend themselves in this situation. In the age of Twitter and social media, their lives are ruined. For example, US TV personalities like Matt Lauer, Mike Halperin, etc. never uttered a word in their own defense, even though they never forced themselves on anyone -- they were acting on flirty signals from their girlfriends. Flirtation is a gray area and they certainly aren't random rapists who are strangers to their victims, but nevertheless they quickly self-destructed, and never stood up for themselves. No one else did, either. They were thrown to the wolves for kissing or petting a woman who was in all likelihood flirtatious with them.

Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky? You say the relationship was inappropriate because of "power dynamics?" Hold on, that's what you say now: only a few years ago office romance was commonplace and accepted by everyone as normal. It was absolutely common and typical for older men with status to be both interested in and targeted by younger women. Let's extend this projection to what's going to happen in the future, since we know how cultural norms are shifting: Currently you say a 53-year-old man "immorally seduced" a 23-year-old subordinate (despite everything being 100% consensual and adult); the next iteration of this will be that you'll be protesting against a 53-year-old man dating a 23-year-old woman period, on the grounds of an "immorally big age gap," regardless of whether they even work together. See where I'm going with this? It's an ever-increasing assault on sexual liberty. It'll extend from the workplace to all aspects of life, like it did with Aziz Ansari's private relationship.

And don't be so quick to say "If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine." The feminists are coming next for these very things you've just proposed -- the remaining few things available for sexual recourse. They started with the cheerleaders, the Miss Universe, etc., and purged it of all sexual innuendo. Next, they're going to get to strip clubs, which they'll claim "objectify women" (because, after all, men should be banned from considering women in a sexual light or as sex objects). Likewise they'll get to porn next. We're already living this nightmare in the US -- we had a bill passed, SESTA/FOSTA, which criminalized any discussion of prostitution, forcing the shutdown of Backpage and related sites.

It’s always a problem in the grey areas, granted. And apart from guys who even brag themselves about this behaviour (cough cough... see who I refer to?), admit it, or are caught by justice/police etc or busted with vids or pics, there are lots of grey areas and indeed risks of ruining the lives of guys who did nothing reprehensible.

As for the uber-feminists ... yes they are annoying. Not sure they even always think about women’s best interests , sometimes I guess they are just pissed off that some younger / sexier girls get so much attention and rewards.

But having said that, the trend towards more respect and accountability is rather positive, I think. I just hope it spills over into some developing countries where the situation is much much worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Muku1
So let's say you're a normal guy who does nothing wrong, and you're in a relationship, like US comedian Aziz Ansari. After a consensual sexual relationship, some evil woman who retrospectively didn't like something about the consensual encounter (or something wasn't to her satisfaction) can ruin your life by raising the flag of #MeToo, publicly humiliate you, and accuse you of harassment.

I think popular opinion (rightly) sided with Aziz on this one, right? The 'journalist' in question was roundly criticized by both left and right wing media by female as well as male commentators, he never got sued, he kept his job. Yeah he probably got pretty embarrassed and a bit of a scare during the first 24/48 hours but he's a big boy and he is OK now. Its a bit unfair that the lady who did the accusing hasn't been outed and her name dragged through the mud, but in the grand scheme of things there are many people who have done greater wrongs who are still awaiting justice.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sinapse and Frenchy
So let's say you're a normal guy who does nothing wrong, and you're in a relationship, like US comedian Aziz Ansari. After a consensual sexual relationship, some evil woman who retrospectively didn't like something about the consensual encounter (or something wasn't to her satisfaction) can ruin your life by raising the flag of #MeToo, publicly humiliate you, and accuse you of harassment. Men can't defend themselves in this situation. In the age of Twitter and social media, their lives are ruined. For example, US TV personalities like Matt Lauer, Mike Halperin, etc. never uttered a word in their own defense, even though they never forced themselves on anyone -- they were acting on flirty signals from their girlfriends. Flirtation is a gray area and they certainly aren't random rapists who are strangers to their victims, but nevertheless they quickly self-destructed, and never stood up for themselves. No one else did, either. They were thrown to the wolves for kissing or petting a woman who was in all likelihood flirtatious with them.

Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky? You say the relationship was inappropriate because of "power dynamics?" Hold on, that's what you say now: only a few years ago office romance was commonplace and accepted by everyone as normal. It was absolutely common and typical for older men with status to be both interested in and targeted by younger women. Let's extend this projection to what's going to happen in the future, since we know how cultural norms are shifting: Currently you say a 53-year-old man "immorally seduced" a 23-year-old subordinate (despite everything being 100% consensual and adult); the next iteration of this will be that you'll be protesting against a 53-year-old man dating a 23-year-old woman period, on the grounds of an "immorally big age gap," regardless of whether they even work together. See where I'm going with this? It's an ever-increasing assault on sexual liberty. It'll extend from the workplace to all aspects of life, like it did with Aziz Ansari's private relationship.

And don't be so quick to say "If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine." The feminists are coming next for these very things you've just proposed -- the remaining few things available for sexual recourse. They started with the cheerleaders, the Miss Universe, etc., and purged it of all sexual innuendo. Next, they're going to get to strip clubs, which they'll claim "objectify women" (because, after all, men should be banned from considering women in a sexual light or as sex objects). Likewise they'll get to porn next. We're already living this nightmare in the US -- we had a bill passed, SESTA/FOSTA, which criminalized any discussion of prostitution, forcing the shutdown of Backpage and related sites.
All very good points. Social change is like a derailed diesel train. The only way to be safe is to not go anywhere near the tracks. The Clinton one in particular bugs me. Monica Lewinsky a
So let's say you're a normal guy who does nothing wrong, and you're in a relationship, like US comedian Aziz Ansari. After a consensual sexual relationship, some evil woman who retrospectively didn't like something about the consensual encounter (or something wasn't to her satisfaction) can ruin your life by raising the flag of #MeToo, publicly humiliate you, and accuse you of harassment. Men can't defend themselves in this situation. In the age of Twitter and social media, their lives are ruined. For example, US TV personalities like Matt Lauer, Mike Halperin, etc. never uttered a word in their own defense, even though they never forced themselves on anyone -- they were acting on flirty signals from their girlfriends. Flirtation is a gray area and they certainly aren't random rapists who are strangers to their victims, but nevertheless they quickly self-destructed, and never stood up for themselves. No one else did, either. They were thrown to the wolves for kissing or petting a woman who was in all likelihood flirtatious with them.

Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky? You say the relationship was inappropriate because of "power dynamics?" Hold on, that's what you say now: only a few years ago office romance was commonplace and accepted by everyone as normal. It was absolutely common and typical for older men with status to be both interested in and targeted by younger women. Let's extend this projection to what's going to happen in the future, since we know how cultural norms are shifting: Currently you say a 53-year-old man "immorally seduced" a 23-year-old subordinate (despite everything being 100% consensual and adult); the next iteration of this will be that you'll be protesting against a 53-year-old man dating a 23-year-old woman period, on the grounds of an "immorally big age gap," regardless of whether they even work together. See where I'm going with this? It's an ever-increasing assault on sexual liberty. It'll extend from the workplace to all aspects of life, like it did with Aziz Ansari's private relationship.

And don't be so quick to say "If you wanna jerk off over a pretty girl, go watch porn, or hire an escort or whatever. Thats fine." The feminists are coming next for these very things you've just proposed -- the remaining few things available for sexual recourse. They started with the cheerleaders, the Miss Universe, etc., and purged it of all sexual innuendo. Next, they're going to get to strip clubs, which they'll claim "objectify women" (because, after all, men should be banned from considering women in a sexual light or as sex objects). Likewise they'll get to porn next. We're already living this nightmare in the US -- we had a bill passed, SESTA/FOSTA, which criminalized any discussion of prostitution, forcing the shutdown of Backpage and related sites.
it’s always been that men, when accused of rape or, even worse, child sexual abuse, are immediately tried in the court of public opinion and always found guilty. Nothing has changed there and it probably never will. My impression is that what #MeToo is changing is the abusive bullshit behavior of men in power in the workplace. That is where the emphasis seems to be. Guys like Lauer and Bill Oreilly have been put on notice. Not such a bad thing in my opinion. Monica Lewinsky can go take a flying fuck. That anyone would dare to call her a victim is hilarious. The only things Clinton did wrong are 1. Cheat on his wife and get caught. He lied to his wife and everyone else and he got caught. Bad boy Bill. Next! 2. The other thing he did wrong was have sex in the Oval Office. Sorry Bill, bad move. For lovers of democracy, that is hallowed ground and he shouldn’t have sullied it. Or he should have, but with somebody much hotter than Monica.
 
All very good points. Social change is like a derailed diesel train. The only way to be safe is to not go anywhere near the tracks. The Clinton one in particular bugs me. Monica Lewinsky a

it’s always been that men, when accused of rape or, even worse, child sexual abuse, are immediately tried in the court of public opinion and always found guilty. Nothing has changed there and it probably never will. My impression is that what #MeToo is changing is the abusive bullshit behavior of men in power in the workplace. That is where the emphasis seems to be. Guys like Lauer and Bill Oreilly have been put on notice. Not such a bad thing in my opinion. Monica Lewinsky can go take a flying fuck. That anyone would dare to call her a victim is hilarious. The only things Clinton did wrong are 1. Cheat on his wife and get caught. He lied to his wife and everyone else and he got caught. Bad boy Bill. Next! 2. The other thing he did wrong was have sex in the Oval Office. Sorry Bill, bad move. For lovers of democracy, that is hallowed ground and he shouldn’t have sullied it. Or he should have, but with somebody much hotter than Monica.

But, what if he had sex with his wife in the Oval Office? Is that considered proper or not? :D
PS: in my country a president died in Elysee palace while being sucked by his mistress , and everybody love the story, and it was 100 years ago ... so decadent those frenchies!
 
Having sex with either Monica or Hilary is gross and shouldn't take place in any room, oval or otherwise.

I wonder whether Trump tried . He totally has the “profile” for this. Sure Kennedy did it too.
 
But, what if he had sex with his wife in the Oval Office? Is that considered proper or not? :D
PS: in my country a president died in Elysee palace while being sucked by his mistress , and everybody love the story, and it was 100 years ago ... so decadent those frenchies!
No it would not be ok in the Oval. Even with Hillary. Especially with Hillary. Anywhere In the White House is OK for fucking except the Oval. This is a secret rule in the Constitution that a Frenchman couldn’t be expected to understand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frenchy
Having sex with either Monica or Hilary is gross and shouldn't take place in any room, oval or otherwise.

That's what I have said all the time. Kennedy banged Marilyn who was one of the hottest girls of her time. And Bill goes and bangs Monica? He did bring the presidency in shame says me.

Moreover any boss banging his/her underling or teacher banging his/her student deserves all the blame and abuse he/she gets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AliceInWonderland
That's what I have said all the time. Kennedy banged Marilyn who was one of the hottest girls of her time. And Bill goes and bangs Monica? He did bring the presidency in shame says me.

Moreover any boss banging his/her underling or teacher banging his/her student deserves all the blame and abuse he/she gets.
Gary Hart got photographed with that hot super model on his kneee on the super yacht. Tanked his shot at the big job. He would have got my vote though.
 
That's what I have said all the time. Kennedy banged Marilyn who was one of the hottest girls of her time. And Bill goes and bangs Monica? He did bring the presidency in shame says me.

Moreover any boss banging his/her underling or teacher banging his/her student deserves all the blame and abuse he/she gets.
I agree with your second point but I don’t ever rule it out as a possibility. As long as you are comfortable that there is no coercion, then it enters the realm of calculated risk.
 
Gary Hart got photographed with that hot super model on his kneee on the super yacht. Tanked his shot at the big job. He would have got my vote though.

I think they did not actually publish that picture until later. So he just chickened out, if he stood up and said fuck you instead I would have liked him way more.