quote: Six women who came into contact with Arnold Schwarzenegger on movie sets, in studio offices and in other settings over the last three decades say he touched them in a sexual manner without their consent.
In interviews with The Times, three of the women described their surprise and discomfort when Schwarzenegger grabbed their breasts. A fourth said he reached under her skirt and gripped her buttocks.
A fifth woman said Schwarzenegger groped her and tried to remove her bathing suit in a hotel elevator. A sixth said Schwarzenegger pulled her onto his lap and asked whether a certain sexual act had ever been performed on her.
According to the women's accounts, one of the incidents occurred in the 1970s, two in the 1980s, two in the 1990s and one in 2000.
"Did he rape me? No," said one woman, who described a 1980 encounter in which she said Schwarzenegger touched her breast. "Did he humiliate me? You bet he did."
quote: California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger responded today to allegations by six women that he groped them inappropriately over the last three decades by acknowledging that he had "behaved badly" in the past and saying he was "deeply sorry."
"And so what I want to say to you is that, yes, I have behaved badly sometimes," the actor said in front of supporters in San Diego. "Yes, it is true, that I was on rowdy movie sets and I have done things that were not right which I thought then was playful, but now I recognize that I have offended people. And those people that I have offended, I want to say to them, 'I am deeply sorry about that and I apologize, because this is not what I'm trying to do.' "
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
Hmm. That's interesting. If it was how Arnold said, then maybe it was ok. However, unless it was in a very certain context he was totally out of line.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
SIX women, Ryan! Read the first article -- this is NOT ok-type touching.
Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
Ok from what I read that you included in the post (can't access the rest because I don't have a login), that it was 6 women over 30 years in a string of unrelated minor instances. Now the whole lap thing was out of hand as well as the swimsuit. But a joking boob pat or butt grab during a party with someone you know and have that kind of relatioship with? Now I know they felt offended and Arnold apologized.
Now it could be different with adults but in my experience I have several girl friends that I jokingly do that to. They do the same thing to me and my other guy friends. It all depends on the relationship.
Arnold erred I know. I'm not trying to say it's ok. But in a certain context it could be a misunderstanding.
I could very well be COMPLETELY wrong though. I wasn't there.
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
There is no man other than my husband I would allow to "jokingly" come within a foot of my breasts. Posted by Ryan Hart (Member # 5513) on :
Ok yeah if they were married that changes EVERYTHING. I was assuming they were single.
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
I wouldn't have let them BEFORE I was married!!!
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
A lot of women WILL though, especially with celebrities like arnold.
I understand what Ryan is saying. At a lot of wild parties, this sorta thing might very well be a misunderstanding, or the women might even have invited it in some ways. This doesn't make it right... what I'm saying, and what Ryan is saying, is that in certain contexts it might have been very reasonable for arnold to assume he had the consent of the women.
I don't know what the circumstances were, though. Given that I don't know the circumstances, adn that he apologized, I'm guessing that this was not wild hollywood party situation.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I agree with Maureen. If any guy did that to me, I'd kick him in the balls. Hard. Several times.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
From what I've heard (no source on this) his first words upon meeting his wife at a party for the first time were "Nice ass".
The man will never be held up as the champion of the feminist movement. But wait, didn't Ted Kennedy kill a girl once? Oh wait, that's right, that was never proven...
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
Why do you have to make this a conservative versus liberal thing? And they have nothing in common anyway, so that was totally pointless to bring up.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
The question is why do you?
I was making it an "all politicians are scumbags" thing. If you didn't notice, I wasn't touting one over the other.
[ October 02, 2003, 08:28 PM: Message edited by: FlyingCow ]
Posted by Rappin' Ronnie Reagan (Member # 5626) on :
Meh. Then forgive me.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Clearly people here need to see other bits.
Of the article!
quote: As she sat on an exercise bench, Stockton said, Schwarzenegger walked up behind her, reached under her T-shirt and touched her bare left breast.
"The gym is full of bodybuilders and Arnold comes and he gropes my breast — actually touches my breast with his left hand," she said.
She said Schwarzenegger then walked away without saying a word.
Another woman:
quote: On an earlier occasion, she recalled, Schwarzenegger had asked her when she was going on break. "We could have a lot of fun in half an hour," she remembered him saying. She said she was both a little scared and a little flattered. "I can't say I wasn't flattered. Arnold invited me to his apartment." She said she declined his invitation.
Schwarzenegger later renewed his invitation, she said, when he spotted her playing in a women's volleyball tournament at Venice Beach. "After the game, he came up to me and said, 'Now you will come to my apartment.' He didn't want to hear no." The woman said she told him, "It's not going to happen."
Now, she said, as she walked along 19th Street, Schwarzenegger conveyed a sense of urgency: "Come close, it's very important." As she drew nearer to his car to hear what he had to say, she recounted, Schwarzenegger "grabbed and squeezed" her left breast.
"If I was a man," she said she told him, "I would bust your jaw."
As tears welled in her eyes, she said, Schwarzenegger laughed. "He thought it was hilarious."
She said she went to her car and "just started crying and crying."
An actress who worked with him in 1990:
quote: "At least three times — if not more — he would end up in the elevator with me, groping me and trying to take my robe off," said the crew member, now 41 and still working in the movie industry.
"He would pin me against the corner in the elevator" and try to take off her robe and pull down the straps of her suit, she said.
The incidents did not last long, she said, because the elevator ride was short.
The woman said her response to Schwarzenegger's actions evolved with each incident. "The first time, you're like, "Oh, my God! I was groped by Arnold Schwarzenegger!' The second time you're like, 'This is disgusting.' The third time you're like, 'Get the ... away from me.' "
She said she told her boss, who advised her, "Just stay away from him."'
Tell me again how "maybe it's ok"! Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Forgiven!
It's not okay. It's rude, it's insensitive, it's invasive, it's offensive, and it doesn't make you warm and fuzzy inside.
It's also common. And it likely won't affect his chances of being elected. He's a womanizer, sure. Clinton was elected, no? And reelected, no? Kennedy allegedly had women in and out of the White House. How about all the politicians with drug problems, or embezzlement or anything else?
...
Don't mind me, I'm just jaded. I've known Schwartzeneggar was a egotistical chauvanist for years... just by listening to him give interviews. So's Rush Limbaugh. So are untold numbers of other people.
It's just nice to jump up and down on them with spikey shoes every now and then, to make ourselves feel better.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote: It's just nice to jump up and down on them with spikey shoes every now and then, to make ourselves feel better.
*volunteers!* Yeah, I knew he was a misogynistic jerk. I just had no idea he was this much of a misogynistic jerk!
And you're right, that's completely separate from the fact that I think he'd be a terrible governor.
I'm an ABA supporter! Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
I find two things about this interesting.
First, that Grey Davis weren't the ones that put this forward, and now aren't really attacking him. Which, to me, is a waste of a good opportunity. Haven't I heard Swartzenegger talking about morals and working with children? How'd you like a guy with this kind of record around your 14 year old girl?
Secondly, although from what I'ver read you guys don't like turning this partisan, I can't help but think that if the tables were turned, we'd have a bunch of people calling for the governatorial equivilant of special prosecutors, and lots of people making retarded jokes about [bad ahnold accent]ahnold did a bad, bad thing[/bad ahnold accent] or some such.
I don't know. I'm so tired of liars, cheaters, and corporate theives running my government I could just scream. And Arnold wouldn't be any better. The man's got steroids for brains, he's an arch-conservative in the worst sort of way, and he has no connection or care for an ordinary american. Why is he leading?
If only Britain would let me move there....
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
1) Tell me again how "maybe it's ok"
No one said its ok.
2) You're right, I should have read teh article for more details.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
He was definitely wrong for doing it but at least he admitted it and apologized unconditionally unlike someone else we may have heard of. I would hope he doesn't do that any more. However, none what he did is particulary uncommon. A lot of guys do it, I don't, and the girls just let it happen. This doesn't make it any more acceptable but in this case the victim does actually have some responsibility to prevent it. Sorry if I sound sexist but its unfortunately the case.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
He walked up to several women, with no warning, and grabbed various portions of their anatomy. When they objected, he laughed. At least one had told him no on a previous occasion.
How were they supposed to "prevent it"?
Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
quote: but at least he admitted it and apologized unconditionally unlike someone else we may have heard of
I don't recall hearing stories about how monica was forced under Bill's desk. As I recall, she wanted to go under there.
There is no comparison there. This is one step removed from rape.
Womanizing is one thing, forcing your attentions on someone who doesn't want them is quite another.
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
The more I learn about Arnold, the more he sounds like a real asshole. Like at one point in time he took his co-star, a 14 year old girl, and her friend to Planet Hollywood. The friend was really shy, so, to help her out of her shell, he smeared a lot of chocolate cake all over her face. When she ran to the bathroom in tears, Arnold was Very Confused.
That and statements like, "Being pumped up is like being in a constant ejaculatory state," made me think of him as having a huge ego, but now THIS is just a bit too damn much.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
It takes a special kind of stubbornness to defend Shwarzenegger in this.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
All together, repeat after me: ABA! ABA! ABA! Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
::hoists bic lighter, flicks and holds::
ABBA! ABBA! ABBA!
Play Knowing Me Knowing You!
Woo--Hoo!
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*thwaps Erik* Posted by Erik Slaine (Member # 5583) on :
::lighter goes flying::
::touches off nearby hippy::
Now, see what you've done? Those angel flights are gonna melt to his shaking bottom!
Posted by Beren One Hand (Member # 3403) on :
As a liberal who defended Clinton's sexual habits as irrelevant to the political discussion, I will apply the same standard to Schwarzenegger's situation.
Schwarzenegger's wondering hands is a problem between him and his wife. As a voter, I don't give a damn. Unless one of these women comes forward and actually proves in court that Schwarzenegger sexually harrassed them, I will ignore this "news" like I ignored Ken Starr.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
Women should prevent it by not tolerating it in the first place. If we included these actions as rape half the male population would be in prison for a long time.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
*raises eyebrow*
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Beren, if they were merely "wandering" I would agree. But these incidents were harassment and battery -- and he clearly doesn't see that his behavior is a problem until it is splashed on the front page.
And he wants to be governor?? And, God help us, may yet be!
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
nfl, I have no idea if that was meant seriously.
If it was, do you REALLY think that would help things?? Assuming, for a moment, that your assertion is close to accurate -- which I seriously doubt. Really, half the male population walks around grabbing at women? Lock up your daughters!
Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
Rivka's point is precise. Clinton's escapades didn't matter because they were consensual. (In fact, I got the impression that monica and company were pretty damn happy to get the chance, myself). Arnold's gropings were not consensual. They were sexual abuse and harrasment.
Heres another difference. Clinton wasn't trying to get into office based on morals and honesty. Arnold is.
Posted by Da_Goat (Member # 5529) on :
With such a heavy german accent, I'd be surprised if most of those weren't complete misunderstandings.
"May I touch your boobs?" says Arnold.
The victim looks down at her untied shoes. "Oh yes, thank you, I don't know how I missed that."
And whamo!; he's got a lawsuit on his hands.
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Is he? I kinda thought his platform consisted mostly of "I'm not Gray Davis" and "I'm not as bad as all the other recall candidates... really..."
...almost forgot one... "Yeah, and I'm famous, too."
On just those three statements, he'd probably win.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
I won't defend Shwarzenegger on this (I don't even know if it's all true or exaggerated or whatnot), but something blacwolve said bothered me:
quote: I would kick him in the balls. Hard. Several times.
I don't condone inappropriate touching in any form without consent (although it wouldn't be inappropriate with consent would it? ), but kicking a guy in the balls in not like in the movies. blacwolve, it has some serious effects like sterility. Especially if you do it repeatedly. Yes, the pain will make him think twice, but do you honestly believe that you have the right to make a man sterile for grabbing a woman inappropriately? If your answer was yes, you don't need to explain, and I'll even respect your position, I just want to know if you really feel that way.
This has nothing to do with Shwarzenegger by the way, I just wanted to ask that question.
Posted by Beren One Hand (Member # 3403) on :
Rivka, I agree with you. If the allegations were true, then his actions would constitute battery and clearly that's not the kind of person we want running California. (Actually, he shouldn't be governor for a variety of other reasons.) However, just as I gave Clinton the benefit of the doubt, I will not condemn Arnold until these allegations are proven.
quote:Women should prevent it by not tolerating it in the first place
Yeah. Why do women keep giving us mixed signals like walking down the street without a burka? I mean, come on, how can a red blooded American male tell whether a woman want us to touch their breast or not?
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
quote: I understand what Ryan is saying. At a lot of wild parties, this sorta thing might very well be a misunderstanding, or the women might even have invited it in some ways. This doesn't make it right... what I'm saying, and what Ryan is saying, is that in certain contexts it might have been very reasonable for arnold to assume he had the consent of the women.
I realize that Paul already stepped down about this. But I have to say, it still scares the crap out of me. That it could even be conceivable that somewhere, there might be a "situation" where a man would think he would have the right to invade a woman's personal space to this horrible degree. What if I'm at a party (I don't go to parties, this is hypothetical) and some guy just starts groping me I thinks he can get away with it because he's famous and it's a "wild" party? If I'm there, am I giving unspoken consent, "I'm at a cool party, I must be a slut, so grope at will?" Would people start sticking up for him?
Truthfully, I'm getting worked up about this because I was in a similar situation. Back in the day I was playing street ball with some guys and because there was a lot of teasing, and obviously, physical contact involved in the game, one of them thought he could take it a step further. I realized how he might think what he did was "silly" because we were teenagers and playing around, but I taught him just exactly how "silly" it was.
So it's easy for me to be very harsh about this whole thing. I stand firm in the idea that guys should save themselves a lot of trouble and keep their hands to themselves until they've said their vows.
LOL Nick! What exactly would you have a woman do if she can't kick a guy in the balls? Jab at his eyes? There are very few things most women can do to defend or protect themselves unless they are a blackbelt. Should we all get blackbelts?
*seriously considers getting a blackbelt*
[ October 02, 2003, 11:14 PM: Message edited by: MaureenJanay ]
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Beren, I agreed with every word of your last post. Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Women could save themselves a lot of trouble if they wouldn't do everything. possible to invite guys to grope them short of saying "please handle my breasts."
Sorry, but blaming the stuff that goes on at certain sorts of parties only on the guys is taking a very narrow view.
Posted by Beren One Hand (Member # 3403) on :
quote:Clinton's escapades didn't matter because they were consensual.
This is a very good point by Rivka and Q-Wolf. If the allegations against Arnold are true, then it is far worse than anything Clinton has done.
However, I still believe that it was a gross abuse of power for Clinton to screw an intern. Bosses should not sleep with their employees, period. There is always the question of whether meaningful consent can be given in situations where one party holds the other party's livelihood in their hands. [insert inappropriate joke here] While consent is possible--Monica turned out to be a media whore who loved every minute of her celebrity--we should discourage bosses from putting their employees in this type of situation in the first place.
[ October 02, 2003, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: Beren One Hand ]
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
Paul, I'm sure there are a few girls that would be thrusting their chests at Arnold and rubbing up against him. But those probably aren't the kinds of women that would be complaining about it. They'd be bragging.
Plus, I'm not blaming it on the guys, I'm just scared that an innocent woman might be taken advantage of under the excuse of "It was a wild party, and I thought she looked like she wanted me." A dude like Arnold is probably egotistical enough to think all women want him. I'm well aware of what women do to invite touching and flirting and whatnot. I just wouldn't want to be confused with a girl like that just because it was "that kind of party."
[ October 02, 2003, 11:26 PM: Message edited by: MaureenJanay ]
Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
Hey Paul, by that line of reasoning, you're saying that it'd be ok for me to grab your ass next time you wear jeans, because, mmm mmm mmm, you've got such a sexy ass. And if my hand just happend to slide around to that gorgeious bulge in front, that'd be ok, too, right?
(I'm male by the way).
Wrong. It wouldn't. So if its not your fault you turn a gay guy on, why is it a woman's fault if she turned you on?
Yeesh. This whole biblical "women are evil temptresses" thing is ridiculous. Part of being a functioning member of society means showing self restraint.
quote: Bosses should not sleep with their employees, period.
Agreed. But for all her media whoredom, I don't recall her ever trying to claim that she felt compelled to do it or lose her job.
I didn't say Clinton was right. But his offense is so much less important in terms of his job and his place then Arnold's transgressions (or bush's, or cheney's, or...), it hardly bears mentioning.
Posted by Ralphie (Member # 1565) on :
quote:Hey Paul, by that line of reasoning, you're saying that it'd be ok for me to grab your ass next time you wear jeans, because, mmm mmm mmm, you've got such a sexy ass. And if my hand just happend to slide around to that gorgeious bulge in front, that'd be ok, too, right?
I suddenly require you to do this just so I can see Paul's reaction.
So, you know, you have to wait until I'm there.
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
I live close to Paul...
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
This whole thing is getting out of hand.
No one is saying that women are just asking to be groped, just by walking outside, those poor men can't help themselves, and
no one is saying that if a man touches a woman, it's all his fault, no matter what transpired between them.
I'd say we're all acceptably in between these two ideas.
It seems like we're all so eager to defend one side that seems to be getting neglected, that we're missing the basic point that we all probably all agree on the most important thing. No one should touch another person inappropriately against their will. Right?
[ October 02, 2003, 11:50 PM: Message edited by: MaureenJanay ]
Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
lol
Posted by JonnyNotSoBravo (Member # 5715) on :
I was watching NewsNight on CNN with Aaron Brown, and there was an interesting parallel drawn between Bob Packwood (a former Senator from Oregon), who was forced to resign due to allegations of sexual harassment, and Arnold.
Two questions sprang up in my mind. 1) Is it because Packwood was an old, average looking guy (possibly fulfilling the "dirty old man" stereotype) that he was forced to resign, whereas Arnold is a somewhat younger, buff actor and his camapign therefore won't be affected? 2)Is it more because Packwood was in office and Arnold isn't yet?
Posted by qkslvrwolf (Member # 5768) on :
Not to be partisan, but what party did the senator belong to?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Not to defend Arnold, but wasn't Packwood's victim a member of his staff? That adds a significant dimension -- that made him a sexual harasser on the public's dime.
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
I don't think what Arnold Schwarzenegger was right, justified, or acceptable. What I am saying is that women put up with it. They accept it, and when it happens they tend to either "like" it or give a "look". If you don't think this happens then open your eyes and watch what men, especially young men do. OK, maybe half the male population was an exaggeration, but still a large percentage do act that way. They see bolder men do it and get away with it and then they do it. This doesn't make it any less acceptable but it does mean that women have to actively disprove of it. Instead, all I've ever seen is toleration.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
And so therefore they should stop complaining . . .
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
No, they aren't complaining as it is. From what I see women generally tolerate it.
Posted by Traveler (Member # 3615) on :
I'm just amazed that Arnold is supposedly leading the polls in California. This guy has put forth no real political platform, refused to participate in any 'serious' debates (you know, ones where you don't get the questions in advance), has been known in the Hollywood community for a long time as 'the Octupus' due to his groping of women habits, and seems to be sliding by on his name recognition alone.
Are Californians truly this desperate?
Plus...how can this man represent the Republican party? I agree with the previous posters that Arnold's actions are MUCH MUCH worse then anything Clinton did. The Republican party likes to think of itself as a moral compass and staunch supporter of 'family values', etc...how does Arnold fit that mold?
I'm wondering why his wife is sticking with him...after all these women have come forth with these stories (one as recent as 2001). He is obviously a chronic womanizing sexist pig.
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
quote: From what I see women generally tolerate it.
I think this is because they aren't sure what to do. In the article one woman said she told Arnold that if she were a man, she would punch him, and just laughed at her until she cried. I think many women feel helpless in these sorts of situations and may try to pretend it doesn't bother them much just because it's so embarrassing and they don't know what to do. And the whole "maybe the woman invited it" thing tends to leave women doubting themselves. They may think that they inadvertently did something to make the man feel like this would be acceptable.
Posted by Traveler (Member # 3615) on :
It is very simple..
No Means No.
A woman could be walking down the street in a a g-string and skimpy top...but that does not justify a bunch of guys jumping her and groping her does it? No it doesn't.
The final responsiblity in any situation like this is upon the the man to practice something called 'self-control' and 'good judgement'.
If some poor Joe working a 'everyday job' did something similar to this he'd have the book thrown at him in a heartbeat for sexual harrassment. Why does Arnold get a free pass? Being a famous actor should not give someone a green light to abuse women.
Posted by MaureenJanay (Member # 2935) on :
"No means No" doesn't help very much after the woman's already be groped. He may get in trouble, but there's still not much she can do to take back the groping.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
I think we all agree what "acceptable" behavior is. I.e. a woman shouldn't get mugged even if she's wearing a g-string and bikini top for a walk around the block. She might get cited for indecent exposure though in some towns.
The question I have is this: In this ideal society do expect more self control from men than from women? And if so is this fair?
There have been many studies showing that males are far more aroused by visual images alone than their female counterparts.
I'm not proposing we all wear burkas. I came from a family in which I was pretty much forced to wear unflattering clothing because anything even remotely becoming would have been "tempting" to guys. The lovely religous argument used was that we "should not cause our weaker brother to stumble" combined with "if a man looks at a woman with lust in his eye he is committing adultery" Therefore the responsibility was on the woman to not cause men to lust.
But there has to be a intermediate comprimise between the two extremes. Perhaps the same self-control a mature (in wisdom not years) male expresses by not groping attractive females, should be exhibited by the females when choosing what to dress and not wearing the skimpiest thing in their closet if it isn't appropriate.
Am I totally off the deep end here? I guess in my own life, I personally enjoy showing skin (if it is warm) but I dress exactly like the guys while I'm at work in deliberately baggier clothes (which also happen to be comfy) so that my feminine characteristics aren't as obvious.
AJ
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
"Hey Paul, by that line of reasoning, you're saying that it'd be ok for me to grab your ass next time you wear jeans, because, mmm mmm mmm, you've got such a sexy ass. And if my hand just happend to slide around to that gorgeious bulge in front, that'd be ok, too, right?"
Strawman alert. Argument in no way resembles my argument.
To phrase clearly for the reading impaired...
Putting the entire blame for groping that goes on in certain circumstances on men is ridiculous in the extreme. Women do everything but verbally ask to be groped, in certain environments... and men do everything but verbally ask to be groped, as well. And both men and women do group in those circumstances.
This does NOT MAKE UNWANTED GROPING OK! I was responding to comments above my post where the entire blame was put on men. I think that attitude is blind to reality.
The next person who says I think groping is ok is going to get a serious swearing at.
[ October 03, 2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Paul Goldner ]
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Paul:
quote:I think groping is ok
I think that's a pretty disgusting attitude on your part.
>_<
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
Not even close to being funny, jerk.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Oh, come now. I'm sure it's at least close to being funny . . .
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
Did anyone ever see Arnolds romantic movie, "True Lies".
When it came out people protested its portrayal of Arabs.
I watched it and was sickened by its portrayal of women. The wife considers having an affair because her husband ignores her. In retaliation the husband abuses the power of his job, kidnaps her, terrorizes her, and basically tortures her mentally.
This seems to reflect Arnold's past attitude toward women.
On a side note, Arnold admitted that he "behaved poorly". Note he didn't say that he "acted poorly". That's been known since Conan first came out.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
Anybody else find "behaved poorly" to be an audacious understatement for sexual harrassment?
Frankly, it casts doubt on the sincerity of his apology, as far as I'm concerned.
Posted by Paul Goldner (Member # 1910) on :
I think he doesn't understand why what he did is bad. He might honestly be sorry for causing discomfort in these women, but I don't think he realizes why it caused discomfort and embarrassment, and I don't think he understands that this sort of thing is actually a serious offense.
Posted by seriousfun (Member # 4732) on :
I heard about this from a friend of a friend (I know...) a few days ago. The LA Times was sitting on this, their parent company (the [Chicago] Tribune Corp.) wanted them to release this but they had already editorialized against Arnold and didn't want to rock the boat for some reason. Their latest poll results pushed them over the edge.
Apparently, they have more, and worse, stuff in the holding pen.
This morning, Arnold's campaign manager is bending over backward to state that he doesn't belive Davis has anything to do with this news.
$.02 or less:
Clinton in office/consensual= non-starter.
Arnold (supported by conservatives) with a life-long history, well known in his industry=deal breaker for public office, come on.
Arnold ain't much of a conservative.
A vote for Arnold is a vote for Pete Wilson (Gray Davis' predecessor), who is generally regarded as much worse than Davis, and the real culprit behind California's energy crisis. Wilson is Arnold's campaign consultant.
The Republican party, both Cal and National, is so desperate to elect anyone who will call himself a Republican to the Californian governorship that they will reject capable candidates like Peter Uberroth (sp?) and Tom McClintock for an electable, name-recognized celebrity.
Recall Leno!
Arnold's kid puched my girlfriend's kid when they were in the same preschool together, and the Schwarzeneggers did not apologize.
Women have been reported to be wearing at his rallys today pins saying "Arnold may have groped me, but Davis groped my wallet".
The California legislature is a snake pit. Controlled by democratic snakes. Arnold will, as some have said, spend six months finding where the bathrooms are. He will get zero, nothing, nada done as Governor.
He plans on commuting to the Governor's office from his home in LA. That's about an hour in traffic, over an hour by plane, another hour in the limo.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: I think he doesn't understand why what he did is bad. He might honestly be sorry for causing discomfort in these women, but I don't think he realizes why it caused discomfort and embarrassment, and I don't think he understands that this sort of thing is actually a serious offense.
How could he not know? He's lived in America longer than he has in Austria.
Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
Nick- Yes, I would definitely defend myself if a strange man touched me inappropriately. According to the article, Arnold reached up her skirt. That is NOT okay. Besides, I'm not strong enough to make any man sterile. Knowing me, I'd miss. Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
quote:How could he not know? He's lived in America longer than he has in Austria.
No, he's lived in Hollywood, not in America. Its surprising how different those two places are.
Then again, its scarey how similar they can be.
Posted by wieczorek (Member # 5565) on :
I don't know what's happened since last night, but Arnold said to the press that he had done a short stint in Playboy, but that he had never harrassed any woman. Forgive me if more has been admitted by Arnold or exposed since last night, but as far as I know he has never harrassed anyone.
Something that fails to make itself understood by me is why people (male and female alike) don't tell about something that happens to them (such as sexual harrassment) when it occurs, as opposed to years later. I don't believe that they were "too scared" to tell when it happened, otherwise, why would they shine light on it now? I realize that it may be because they don't want him to harrass or embarrass others if he becomes governor, but wouldn't they not want people to be hurt when it happened, too??
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
He admitted it yesterday. I heard the soundbite around 4 pm.
Posted by Dan_raven (Member # 3383) on :
It could be that they did speak up about it before, but nobody paid them any attention. How newsworth is it that a woman claims a macho actor grabbed her?
Now that Arnold is more in the lime light those comments are more newsworthy.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Each of the women the Times spoke to DID tell people before now -- the Times interviewed their friends, families, etc. However, it is true that none pressed charges or anything like that. Four of the women are still unwilling to go public about who they are.
And who can blame them? The two who did release their names are under attack by radio pundits (I have rarely disliked Larry Elder more than I did yesterday afternoon) and others. And if you work in Hollywood (as three of the four do), having your name linked to this would be the kiss of death for your career.
Of COURSE there are far far better reasons NOT to vote for Arnold than this. But none of them seem to have done the trick.
You'd think Californians would learn not to elect an actor for governor!
Posted by FlyingCow (Member # 2150) on :
Yes, when will they learn? You have to elect *wrestlers* not actors... sheesh. Where've they been?
Posted by mackillian (Member # 586) on :
Pinned.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Now that Arnold is more in the lime light those comments are more newsworthy.
Especially with some of the media that is very liberally biased.
quote: You'd think Californians would learn not to elect an actor for governor!
Nobody elected him.
When the recall was initiated, you could run if you fill out some papers and pay a large sum of money. Arnold isn't the only one to be able to do that you know. Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
Nick: I think it may be another actor that was being referred to.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
on the issue of the women not reporting the incidents till now, i am pretty much with rivka, with a few additions:
first of all, probably wouldn't have cared as much about the incidents till now.
i've been harrassed by men before, and usually they are much bigger than i am and usually it takes you by such surprise or you are made so uncomfortable that you just kinda freeze up and feel dumb. and even when i've been on my toes, sometimes it is a very STUPID idea to tell off a guy that is already in the mood to start trouble and has already defiled you verbally/groped you and could probably hold you down a lot better than you could knock him unconscious. on one occasion i had no other choice than to flat out run away and hide.
and the sad truth is that usually it is a big waste of time to report sexual harrassment. if you weren't raped, hardly anyone cares and it's hard to prove it. sometimes even if you are raped it doesn't matter to many. i am not saying sexual harrassment is okay, i am disgusted by it. but at the same time, i probably wouldn't do much in way of reporting it (minus job-site incidents) but if some guy i knew had felt me up suddenly ran for governor i would be concerned about a man with such a character running my state and would say something not for my benefit, but for the benefit of the rest of my state.
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
He was republican.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
[ October 04, 2003, 03:08 AM: Message edited by: aspectre ]
Posted by wieczorek (Member # 5565) on :
quote: Now that Arnold is more in the lime light those comments are more newsworthy.
That makes a good point.
quote: You'd think Californians would learn not to elect an actor for governor!
That's what California's all about - Hollywood. If you live in Napa Valley, you're either thinking about grapes or Hollywood. (I hope any California natives will realize that I am exaggerating )
Posted by Tristan (Member # 1670) on :
quote:How could he not know? He's lived in America longer than he has in Austria.
Well, you know, in Austria it is perfectly OK to grope anyone you want in any circumstances whatsoever; in fact, it is strongly encouraged and considered something of a national characteristic. So, you see, even though Arnold has lived more than half his life in the US -- perhaps the ONLY country that seriously frown upon such behaviour -- he cannot be expected to entirely have shed his groping habits in which he has been so deeply indoctrinated by his Austrian peers and up-bringing.
[ October 04, 2003, 07:14 AM: Message edited by: Tristan ]
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I think there are situations where men and women get playful in over-the-line ways. I do not get the sense that the Arnoldized women were playing.
Still, guys, whatever the situation, drunken frat party, bar, or whatever, if a woman decides that you have crossed the line, she can take you to court, even if she has teased and flirted with you. So be careful, and be appropriate, and be respectful, in any situation. (just a little pedantic moment from an old lady)
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Still, guys, whatever the situation, drunken frat party, bar, or whatever, if a woman decides that you have crossed the line, she can take you to court, even if she has teased and flirted with you.
Now this I have a issue with. Girls flirt to show men that they are interested correct? Well, if a guy thinks a girl is interested, wouldn't he want to pursue something further? Like a kiss or an invitation for a dinner/date?
So basically you're saying that guys should be submissive and only become intimate with women when women say so? When do women go to a man and say: "you have my permission to court me"?
Posted by Jill (Member # 3376) on :
Okay, stop the actor bashing. I'm an actor, and I personally don't see why acting is any less respectable a profession than any others. I've met some fine, practical, intelligent actors that would make excellent politicians (honest ones, too, if that's possible). My problem is electing an actor without any political experience. Or any brains.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Nick,
I am not saying it is right, I am saying be careful, because it happens to guys who are innocent all the time.
Liz
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Nick,
I am not saying it is right, I am saying be careful, because it happens to guys who are innocent all the time.
Liz
Oh okay. Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
nick, if most guys' instincts were to pursue a kiss or a date there really wouldn't be an issue.
that is rarely what guys are pursuing when trouble begins.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
Okay porce. Another theoretical situation then:
Guy and girl that were dating for 3 years exclusively were freak-dancing to a song in a night-club. The guy groped the girls behind, and she pressed charges, when they were intimate just the night before. Is that right?
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Nick- Yes, I would definitely defend myself if a strange man touched me inappropriately. According to the article, Arnold reached up her skirt. That is NOT okay. Besides, I'm not strong enough to make any man sterile. Knowing me, I'd miss.
It doesn't take much. I don't know if you would miss or not...
But, are definitely strong enough.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
::applauds Tristan::
::corrects spelling::
[ October 04, 2003, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: Icarus ]
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
nick, i am not defending fickle, flippant women. i am just saying that i wouldn't be offended by a boy asking me out. i would, however; be offended if a boy took physical liberties with me without asking first.
now if i was grinding in said boy's lap, i think it's unspoken that i am okay with a kiss. but to hold me down and have sex with me? no. gah, i think we all know what is right and wrong in these situations, let's stop playing "what if" and "let me make up an outrageous situation for you to pick sides on" unless you have a real experience that you want help figuring out, not to win some hypothetical race, but to do right by everyone in a situation.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
That's what it sounded like porcelain girl. It did sound like you were defending them.
I can see that you did not mean that. I apologize for any disrespect.
quote:Campaign spokesman Rob Sutzman said Saturday that the latest allegations are "not true."
He also said the Times didn't contact the Schwarzenegger campaign for comment until just before the deadline for its first edition Friday night -- not enough time, he said, to gather information from people who could rebut the charges, including Ivan Reitman, the film's director.
"This is unprecedented, gutter, last-minute, 'gotcha' journalism by the largest newspaper in this state," Sutzman said. "They're unfit to own a printing press, and we're not going to take it. The people of California are going to see through this."
In a statement included in later editions of the story and on the Times' Web site, Reitman told the newspaper, "Nothing even approximating what you're saying happened." Two other "Twins" crew members also disputed the charges.
"Obviously, this candidate now has some very powerful enemies for the stances that he has taken and for who he has taken on, including, apparently, the largest newspaper in this state," Sutzman said. "I don't know if they're out to get us or not, but they're certainly not interested in the truth."
Let's not forget that this was the same publication who published a photo from Iraq that was doctored, without bothering to check for authenticity first. The more questionable acts this paper does, the more it is looking like a tabloid rag than a reputable news source.
[ October 04, 2003, 09:37 PM: Message edited by: Argèn†~ ]
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: Let's not forget that this was the same publication who published a photo from Iraq that was doctored, without bothering to check for authenticity first. The more questionable acts this paper does, the more it is looking like a tabloid rag than a reputable news source.
Isn't that true of most publishers?
This paper doesn't care about Arnold, they only care about what sells. That paper--if false--sold like popcorn in a movie theater. That's all they care about.
Posted by Argèn†~ (Member # 4528) on :
It's not about how scrupulous the LA Times is or not, Nick. It's about how it seems so very easy to assume the smear allegations against Arnold are true, without even once asking for some backup to the claims. It was immediately taken for granted that they were true, though Reitman and two other crew members totally deny it. Why is it always easiest to assume the worst?
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"Why is it always easiest to assume the worst?"
I don't know, but it is true that we(as a group) do that. Then, when the truth comes out, no one is really all that interested, and the truth is often found in a five sentence paragraph in the back of the newspaper.
I went to a small college in Vermont, without a whole lot of diverstiy.(OK, there was no diversity). My sophomore year, a black student, who was a freshman, had his door graffiti-ed with racial slurs. The event was front page news in the "Boston Globe." We looked bad, very bad. We all tried to figure out who had done it, why it had happened, etc.
It turned out that the young man had written on his own door.
That part of the story appeared way in the back of the paper, but by that time, no one cared, and just remembered the big headlines.
I don't know if Arnold should be governor or not, but I don't think he is a bad man, and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, even when he puts his foot in his mouth. I hope that, if the allegations are false, we hear about that in the same way.
Posted by blacwolve (Member # 2972) on :
I think the conversation has moved into a discussion of sexual harrassment, so I'll address some of the things said on that subject.
First, Nick, I know exactly what kicking a guy in the balls will do. But really, it's the only semi vulnerable spot that a girl like me, who is very weak, could use to get the point across. However, I'm not sure I would definately kick them in that situation, I would probably be in too much of a shock to do anything.
Second, Newfoundlogic, you disgust me. What exactly are girls supposed to do? Generally, the kind of guy that gropes a girl, isn't going to listen when she tells him to stop. In fact, I would guess that in most situations where a guy is groping a girl against her will, telling him to stop will only accelerate the problem. Girls don't "just let it happen." Most of the time, they're too scared (and they have reason to be) to do anything to stop it.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
If the groin is only vulnerable spot males have, you need to take some self defense classes. I don't mean that in patronizing way either, I really suggest to all women.
There are a lot sensitive areas that are effective in stopping groping or further violation.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
and i can assure you that most girls that are sexually harrassed haven't been gyrating in front of the perpetrator in a thong and heels before the incident.
gah, yes, i am sure there are some stupid screwed up girls out there that take advantage of guys by teasing them then calling rat when the guy makes advances, but i can almost guarantee that when compared with the number of times a girl is messed with just because the guy was a jerk would be like putting a grape next to a grapefruit.
and there are so many factors that need to be taken into account in otherwise questionable situations, such as did the parties know eachother beforehand, and for how long? had they ever had a physical relationship? what interaction was there before the incident? where were they? lots of things.
i am not being sarcastic when i ask this, i sincerely want to know. how many guys here that are comfortable talking about it have felt sexually harassed, sexually assaulted, etc. by a woman? or even another man? what were the circumstances and how did you feel? i would like a male perspective on similar experiences.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
Well, to be honest porce, I have never felt sexually harassed.
I have never been groped. If it was a gay man, I would most likely ask him to stop and then probably forcibly stop him.
If it was a woman, I would ask her to stop, but if she didn't I would have a hard time thinking how to stop her without physical force.
Basically, it's never happened to me.
I have been kicked in the groin however, by a disgustingly rude girl in my junior year of high school. It does NOT feel good. I did nothing to deserve such and attack, because we were in a verbal altercation.
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
What I want to know is where all the holier than thou conservatives who impeached Clinton for less are now? The double standard of the right wing is sickening.
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
quote: What I want to know is where all the holier than thou conservatives who impeached Clinton for less are now? The double standard of the right wing is sickening.
I'm a moderate conservative, and I find that generaliztion very offensive Rabbit.
Clinton had no spine. He was a weak-willed individual. The fact that he sexually misconducted himself in the White House was only used as an excuse for the conservatives that wanted him out.
It's kind of like you know somebody broke a law, yet you can't prove it. So you put them in jail for a different law violation.
Posted by porcelain girl (Member # 1080) on :
where is the justice in that??
Posted by Nick (Member # 4311) on :
I never said it was just, I just didn't like the implication that all conservatives were "holier than thou". I just thought I would explain the position of those that are FAR more conservative than me.
I never wanted Clinton in office anyway.
Posted by Ethics Gradient (Member # 878) on :
Wow. The attitudes of a bunch of Hatrack males are pretty damn disgusting, I think. I'm with Icarus on this one. Sheesh, get a grip folks.
Posted by Storm Saxon (Member # 3101) on :
*applauds Tristan, as well*
One of the finer sarcastic retorts I've seen on this site, imho. Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Wave]](graemlins/wave.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
I don't condone inappropriate touching in any form without consent (although it wouldn't be inappropriate with consent would it? ![[Wink]](wink.gif)
), but kicking a guy in the balls in not like in the movies. blacwolve, it has some serious effects like sterility. Especially if you do it repeatedly. Yes, the pain will make him think twice, but do you honestly believe that you have the right to make a man sterile for grabbing a woman inappropriately? If your answer was yes, you don't need to explain, and I'll even respect your position, I just want to know if you really feel that way.![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Angst]](graemlins/angst.gif)
)
![[Hat]](graemlins/hat.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)