The fact that she didn't mention names makes it less of a challenge.
If she had said Obama did it, that's where we'd have a problem.
And, honestly, given the moral heights of this administration, it wouldn't surprise me.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Kellyanne Conway reveals she is a victim of sexual assault; blames victims immediately after
- Thread starter ZeoVGM
- Start date
If she had said Obama did it, that's where we'd have a problem.
And, honestly, given the moral heights of this administration, it wouldn't surprise me.
Hm. Yes. It is a well known fact that liars don't get sexually assaulted.
Yup. Patterns like, "People who crap on about believing women on matters of sexual assault are prone to abandoning that notion the second the woman in question is one they don't like."
Cute but you know that's not the pattern I'm referring to.
"One they don't like" is dishonestly reductive.
I'm not saying she's necessarily a liar. Given the simple fact that she's a woman means statistically she's likely to have faced it at some point in her life. But trust and honesty go hand in hand. Make a career about lying, don't be surprised when a claim is met with skepticism. Especially when she weaponized her own claim to defend two known sexual predators. You have to be able to see the context in which this claim is being made and how it's used.
You can only cry wolf so many times before people stop taking you seriously....
You're saying that the belief is conditional. "I believe women... sometimes. When the context suits me."
no u r lolololrofllmao
You want to come at me, put some fucking effort into it.
No one's coming at you. Kelly isn't getting eyerolls here because she's disliked. Tomi Lauren and Ann Coulter are scum too, though they would be believed here.
You're damn right it's conditional. Conditional on someone who hasn't made a career out of lying and isn't actively trying to weaponize sexual assault to defend known aggressors.
It's a typical alt-right tactic: find something unconditionally agreed upon by liberals, strip it of context, and force them to get behind you by parroting it right back at them. You would do well to consider the context in which claims are made. Otherwise you play right into their tactics.
Like, man, I get that it's incredibly shitty to doubt survivors of something so utterly horrible, but at the same time, Kellyanne Conway did fabricate a "massacre" in Bowling Green, Kentucky as justification for the travel ban. It's not really "I don't believe her because I don't like her", it's more "I have a particularly hard time completely believing her seeing as she has a pretty well-documented habit of making up terrible things to justify terrible policies for the administration she works for."
It's terrible that Kellyanne Conway was sexually assaulted. No one should have to suffer that. It doesn't, on the other hand, mean she's still not an obnoxious lying scumbag. I believe her, but she's still an asshole, as demonstrated by attempting to use her trauma to cover for a sexual assaulting liar.
"I'm a victim of sexual assault. I don't expect Judge Kavanaugh or Jake Tapper or Jeff Flake or anybody to be held responsible for that. You have to be responsible for your own conduct."
What, exactly, is she arguing here? I mean, unless it was Kavanaugh or Tapper or Flake that sexually assaulted her, why would anyone expect to hold them responsible for her assault?
And that line about people having to be responsible for their own conduct... umm, yeah? Is anyone arguing otherwise? Or is she implying that her actions--whatever they may have been--that resulted in her being sexually assaulted was the precipitating factor for the assault rather than the culpable mind and willful intent of the perpetrator that performed and actively desired the sexual assault?
What, exactly, is she arguing here? I mean, unless it was Kavanaugh or Tapper or Flake that sexually assaulted her, why would anyone expect to hold them responsible for her assault?
And that line about people having to be responsible for their own conduct... umm, yeah? Is anyone arguing otherwise? Or is she implying that her actions--whatever they may have been--that resulted in her being sexually assaulted was the precipitating factor for the assault rather than the culpable mind and willful intent of the perpetrator that performed and actively desired the sexual assault?
I feel like people ran with the least charitble reading of her phrasing. Once we did that, you can see how the more vulgar comments in this thread got a bit of a push out the door. Especially after watching that video, I'll stand by my interpretation. I view the thread title as a bullshit dumpster fire, the OP as not pleasant, and the thread itself as an overall dissappointment. Oh well.
