IMF chief arrested for sexual interpretation of IMF policy

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Liberator
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13443085

Chief of the International Monetary Fund was arrested on charges of rape against a 37 year old Guinea woman.

It's like he's enacting IMF policy (e.g. "raping" developing nations economies) on a human being!

ADarksideJedi
I hope he gets what he deserves if he is guity!

~The Wickerman~
Honestly there can be SO many people involved in this that it's an exercise in futility just mentioning them all. Sarkozy, the US itself, literally dozens of governments all could have had an interest in shooting this guy down Assange style.

That having been said, it shouldn't be assumed that he didn't in fact do it. Logic dictates that a guy with that much money could have easily purchased the services of a companion, but then again, from what I know, rape has less to do with the sex itself, and more to do with the power behind it.

Don't know if he did it or not, I just heard a rumor that the woman lived in a building with a lot of HIV sufferers or something, but I wasn't paying attention. I'll try to keep an ear out for more news on the subject.

Utsukushii
Nasty ass old man. He ran down the hall naked, forced her into a room. Disgusting pig.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by Utsukushii
Nasty ass old man. He ran down the hall naked, forced her into a room. Disgusting pig.

You should really read a bit more of the articles on the subject first. The guy not only had a HUGE amount of enemies, was considered the most likely next president of France, held the biggest international loan shark in the palm of his hand.

There is an extremely high chance that the guy was set up. Shouldn't jump to conclusions like that.

inimalist
lol, everything is a conspiracy these days

who needs evidence?

Bicnarok

~The Wickerman~

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Including the fact that they had no warrant when they picked him up

If laws in France are anything like in the states a warrant is only necessary to compel a person against their will. The idea that they'd ride over and say "Dude we totally got you." is hardly inconceivable.

Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
there was no warrant to stop him from leaving the country, etc.

I'm pretty sure there's no such type of warrant.

King Kandy
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
You should really read a bit more of the articles on the subject first. The guy not only had a HUGE amount of enemies, was considered the most likely next president of France, held the biggest international loan shark in the palm of his hand.

There is an extremely high chance that the guy was set up. Shouldn't jump to conclusions like that.
So basically, your logic is the it is unlikely that rich, powerful people would commit crimes.

IDK about that one.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by King Kandy
So basically, your logic is the it is unlikely that rich, powerful people would commit crimes.

IDK about that one.

Exactly. And your logic is that people who are powerful and influential have never been framed or blackmailed by opponents.

c wut i did thar

King Kandy
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Exactly. And your logic is that people who are powerful and influential have never been framed or blackmailed by opponents.

c wut i did thar
No, I just see no evidence that that is what happened in this case. I'm all for "innocent until proven guilty", but just because he COULD have been framed, doesn't mean he was. For all we know, it could have been his evil twin brother who did it. I don't lend much credence to such possibilities, because they are totally unsubstantiated.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by King Kandy
No, I just see no evidence that that is what happened in this case. I'm all for "innocent until proven guilty", but just because he COULD have been framed, doesn't mean he was. For all we know, it could have been his evil twin brother who did it. I don't lend much credence to such possibilities, because they are totally unsubstantiated.

You think that an immigrant maid making minimum wage being assaulted by one of the most powerful men in the world on foreign soil during a quick visit, left to run out and call the cops, with him not even attempting an escape, with no conclusive reports proving she WAS raped is more substantiated than an immigrant maid making minimum wage being paid a hefty amount by one of the NUMEROUS enemies this guy had (a few including the president of France, the presidents of every single country that has debts in the BILLIONS with the IMF that could then get a puppet to replace him as president of IMF).

Well, that's certainly one way to look at it.

King Kandy
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
You think that an immigrant maid making minimum wage being assaulted by one of the most powerful men in the world on foreign soil during a quick visit, left to run out and call the cops, with him not even attempting an escape, with no conclusive reports proving she WAS raped is more substantiated than an immigrant maid making minimum wage being paid a hefty amount by one of the NUMEROUS enemies this guy had (a few including the president of France, the presidents of every single country that has debts in the BILLIONS with the IMF that could then get a puppet to replace him as president of IMF).

Well, that's certainly one way to look at it.
I have no idea if the guy did it; that'll have to wait for the court case.

I would certainly think the 1st option you mentioned is more likely, though.

dadudemon
Originally posted by King Kandy
I have no idea if the guy did it; that'll have to wait for the court case.
This.


Innocent until proven guilty, I say.


To me, there is an accused and an accuser. Neither side is right or wrong but the accused should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

There could be a very strong motivation for a "poor" hotel cleaner to accuse a rich person of something that could result in her getting money. She could be looking for 15 minutes of fame. He could have assaulted her thinking he was perfectly safe from getting trouble (meaning, he grew complacent in his position of power and thought himself beyond reproach for such an act). He could have also be really horny and she was really good looking AND he had rapist tendencies.


What I'm surprised about: if he has so many enemies AND he's a rapist...at 62, it's far more likely that he would have other accusers come out of the woodwork to also accuse him of the same. Where are they? They usually pop up the first or second day of the accusations.




Also, this should tell you that you should:

1. know the person you are having sex with.

2. Record all of your sexual encounters with strangers.

3. Have them sign a release if you're famous. lol! (I don't meant to laugh.)

4. Keep it in your damn pants.

Bardock42

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by dadudemon
1. know the person you are having sex with.

2. Record all of your sexual encounters with strangers.

3. Have them sign a release if you're famous. lol! (I don't meant to laugh.)

4. Keep it in your damn pants.

If you're famous you should really be having a lawyer present for everything you do.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
If you're famous you should really be having a lawyer present for everything you do.

I agree. Or at least your mother-in-law. big grin

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by dadudemon

What I'm surprised about: if he has so many enemies AND he's a rapist...at 62, it's far more likely that he would have other accusers come out of the woodwork to also accuse him of the same. Where are they? They usually pop up the first or second day of the accusations.


That's right. Initially I thought "come on dude, if the guy was horny he could buy the most expensive piece of ass he can imagine". Then I remembered sexual assault isn't always about being horny. Then I thought given how many enemies the guy has, surely SOMETHING would have come out about this by now. This guy has the power to walk into your country and say "Every single human being in this country is going to cluck like a chicken if you want to be able to foot the electricity bill." If he's found guilty, the guy that replaces him gets that power. That is a hell of a carrot right there.

I am still not sold on whether he's innocent or guilty and only a very well executed investigation will prove one or the other.

All eyes are on the US right now.

dadudemon
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
That's right. Initially I thought "come on dude, if the guy was horny he could buy the most expensive piece of ass he can imagine". Then I remembered sexual assault isn't always about being horny. Then I thought given how many enemies the guy has, surely SOMETHING would have come out about this by now. This guy has the power to walk into your country and say "Every single human being in this country is going to cluck like a chicken if you want to be able to foot the electricity bill." If he's found guilty, the guy that replaces him gets that power. That is a hell of a carrot right there.

I am still not sold on whether he's innocent or guilty and only a very well executed investigation will prove one or the other.

All eyes are on the US right now.


Well, there was no denial by him of sexual activity, I don't think. I didn't read or hear that anywhere. Obviously, some sexual activity occurred. But was it consensual? I hope so. I don't like predators. I know it's almost sad that I'm making this distinction, but I would rather that lady be looking to make money and/or get fame than an actual sexual assault to have occurred.

Edit - It's also very hard to prove rape when the victim was too scared or too passive to resist. It just turns into his word against hers. That's just even more sad and it happens much more often than people want to talk about.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by dadudemon
Well, there was no denial by him of sexual activity, I don't think. I didn't read or hear that anywhere. Obviously, some sexual activity occurred. But was it consensual? I hope so. I don't like predators. I know it's almost sad that I'm making this distinction, but I would rather that lady be looking to make money and/or get fame than an actual sexual assault to have occurred.

I agree, really. Besides, there have been shows all day about this, with dozens of testimonies from people that have met him either professionally or as friends and all of them have been positive. Plus the stuff I mentioned earlier is the sort of stuff the guy COULD do, but he's really honestly quite helpful, he tries to explain everything the IMF plans to ask for and do in detail, he always tries to make the people a priority above the debt the country is about to make. At least from what I saw of him before.

Would suck to know he's an assaulter in many ways, the scariest being that it would tell me just about anyone I know could be one.

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
What I'm surprised about: if he has so many enemies AND he's a rapist...at 62, it's far more likely that he would have other accusers come out of the woodwork to also accuse him of the same. Where are they? They usually pop up the first or second day of the accusations.

A woman came forward and said she was assaulted a few years back by him, but was talked out of pressing charges by her mother because they were all very closely tied to the Socialist party he is the leader of. There are also many other allegations of infidelities and such, though none are non-consensual, and his response to these was akin to "I likes me some women"

Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
I agree, really. Besides, there have been shows all day about this, with dozens of testimonies from people that have met him either professionally or as friends and all of them have been positive.

I hate to burst your bubble, but the psychological profile of people who commit abuses is not "wears a black cape and twirls a villainous mustache"

Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Would suck to know he's an assaulter in many ways, the scariest being that it would tell me just about anyone I know could be one.

you... you didn't know that...?

dadudemon
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Would suck to know he's an assaulter in many ways, the scariest being that it would tell me just about anyone I know could be one.

Dude, you aren't kidding. You'd think that you'd pick up on that, right?

When I was a teen, there was this fella that went to church with me. He worked at a machine rental place (like backhoes, and stuff like that) and I had to make frequent rentals there to do various projects growing up.

We used to just shoot the shit when I'd come by to rent stuff. He was cool, laid back, and nice. He was a great father and a husband.




It was a major punch to the face when it was revealed that he had raped multiple women, molested several girls (children) and had done several explicit things with several minors (teenagers.) His sexual assault knew no age: he just went ape shit on any female he could get his hands on, literally. It was so very NOT like him, even a little. When I found out, I must say that I was dazed/dumbfounded/shocked. It wasn't a panic attack, but it could have been. How can you know someone so well and not pick up on any signs? He was hardworking, loved his family, was nice, etc. WTF?!?!?!?! His wife was devastated because he NEVER did anthing "bad" to his family.


So, anyway, if this dude turns out to be a "bad guy", I'm a bit more jaded and would not be shocked. Some people can hide their "skeletons" a bit better than others. One thing I've picked up, after having experienced the fella I described, is the "eyes." You can tell by watching the eyes of a person. I can't describe it...but perverts have wondering, "shady", eyes.

inimalist
guys, evil people don't exist in some Walt Disney type world where they cackle and have fortresses with blood all over the walls.

you know what the neighbours and FAMILIES of serial killers say about them when they find out their actions?

Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Besides, there have been shows all day about this, with dozens of testimonies from people that have met him either professionally or as friends and all of them have been positive.

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
guys, evil people don't exist in some Walt Disney type world where they cackle and have fortresses with blood all over the walls.

Really?

laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing

I know, I know. It's just that, my first experience with a truly vile person occurred many many years ago and it was quite shocking because I had so closely associated with that person.


Like I said, I'm more jaded and don't think it impossible for anyone to turn out to be an "evil."

Originally posted by inimalist
you know what the neighbours and FAMILIES of serial killers say about them when they find out their actions?

I didn't get into crime/criminology/serial killers until after I had an interest in writing horror which was in my 20s. So, no, when I was a "kid", I had no clue what people would say about those folks.

inimalist
Originally posted by dadudemon
Really?

laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing

I know, I know. It's just that, my first experience with a truly vile person occurred many many years ago and it was quite shocking because I had so closely associated with that person.


Like I said, I'm more jaded and don't think it impossible for anyone to turn out to be an "evil."

fair enough, I suppose I'm more taken aback by wickerman than your story. Does he expect devil horns and a tail on bad people? We should be able to judge someone by what their friends think of them rather than evidence about what they have done?

by that logic, we would have never caught BTK, Gacy, Bundy, etc

Originally posted by dadudemon
I didn't get into crime/criminology/serial killers until after I had an interest in writing horror which was in my 20s. So, no, when I was a "kid", I had no clue what people would say about those folks.

ah. I was reading that stuff when I was 13-14, so I've been cynical of "good people" for a long time. I read it mostly because of how fascinating the psychology was, not that I'm into death (I'm really actually not, I hate horror movies and the like)

Darth Jello
I sympathize with him. He specifically ordered a female Chechen war orphan under the age of 10 and a bump of coke and this was the best the hotel can send him?

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
fair enough, I suppose I'm more taken aback by wickerman than your story. Does he expect devil horns and a tail on bad people? We should be able to judge someone by what their friends think of them rather than evidence about what they have done?

by that logic, we would have never caught BTK, Gacy, Bundy, etc

ah. I was reading that stuff when I was 13-14, so I've been cynical of "good people" for a long time. I read it mostly because of how fascinating the psychology was, not that I'm into death (I'm really actually not, I hate horror movies and the like)

There is no evidence, and your several posts implying I'm naive are misplaced. You assume I expect bad guys to have cloaks and villain mustaches? By that logic, I assume you think every single person you meet is a serial killer and rapist. See what I did there?

Sexual predators that I have read about in the papers or news or the internet (that's me saying I didn't do a lengthy study) are usually NOT in the eye of literally hundreds of people a day, with so many acquaintances, etc. You can attribute the fact that they "seemed perfectly normal" to the fact that they interacted with like 10 people their entire life, 3 of which are the ones being interviewed.

I imagine that someone that had those tendencies and who interacted with this many people would in fact have been picked up on by at least some people. Hearing unanimously positive comments on him from lots of people, (not just the next door neighbor, family members and local priest) and seeing how the guy acts professionally is what I mean by being shocked if it turns out he actually did it.

This underlying belief that if you were in the eye of lots of people someone would eventually pick up on something if you were an assaulter is why I mentioned my acquaintances.

jaden101
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
You should really read a bit more of the articles on the subject first. The guy not only had a HUGE amount of enemies, was considered the most likely next president of France, held the biggest international loan shark in the palm of his hand.

There is an extremely high chance that the guy was set up. Shouldn't jump to conclusions like that.

Not if his previous behaviour is anything to go by...Apparently his sexual deviancy has been getting covered up by high ranking French officials for years.

inimalist
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
There is no evidence, and your several posts implying I'm naive are misplaced. You assume I expect bad guys to have cloaks and villain mustaches? By that logic, I assume you think every single person you meet is a serial killer and rapist. See what I did there?

Sexual predators that I have read about in the papers or news or the internet (that's me saying I didn't do a lengthy study) are usually NOT in the eye of literally hundreds of people a day, with so many acquaintances, etc. You can attribute the fact that they "seemed perfectly normal" to the fact that they interacted with like 10 people their entire life, 3 of which are the ones being interviewed.

I imagine that someone that had those tendencies and who interacted with this many people would in fact have been picked up on by at least some people. Hearing unanimously positive comments on him from lots of people, (not just the next door neighbor, family members and local priest) and seeing how the guy acts professionally is what I mean by being shocked if it turns out he actually did it.

This underlying belief that if you were in the eye of lots of people someone would eventually pick up on something if you were an assaulter is why I mentioned my acquaintances.

you... you do know there is a long history of people reporting this type of abuse against Strauss-Khan, yes?

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
you... you do know there is a long history of people reporting this type of abuse against Strauss-Khan, yes?

The only one I was aware of was the 31 year old novelist. There are more?

inimalist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct

+ he is thrice married (nothing concrete about that, but far less of a conspiracy to think he drove off 2 women than he is getting framed here)

and a reporter claimed he tried to get her to have sex with him for an interview

not only that, the woman assaulted in this case has already been offered 6 mil to keep her mouth closed

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/ imf_accuser_in_apt_for_hiv_vics_oZmUkbtouJ14RHw143
4HvJ/0

inimalist
you know, I'll just post the whole thing, the details of the hotel security cameras are pretty interesting



http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/ imf_accuser_in_apt_for_hiv_vics_oZmUkbtouJ14RHw143
4HvJ

the evidence, as far as I have seen, really doesn't suggest a conspiracy... what evidence did you have again? the mere supposition that rich people wouldn't do something like this?

jaden101
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
The only one I was aware of was the 31 year old novelist. There are more?

http://www.firstpost.com/world/the-sordid-sexual-history-of-dominique-strauss-kahn-10581.html

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2072205,00.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/with-history-of-sexual-slip-ups-strauss-kahn-arrest-raises-questions/article2026021/

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominique_Strauss-Kahn#Allegations_of_sexual_misconduct

+ he is thrice married (nothing concrete about that, but far less of a conspiracy to think he drove off 2 women than he is getting framed here)

and a reporter claimed he tried to get her to have sex with him for an interview

not only that, the woman assaulted in this case has already been offered 6 mil to keep her mouth closed

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/ imf_accuser_in_apt_for_hiv_vics_oZmUkbtouJ14RHw143
4HvJ/0

Surely all men that have been married 3 times are sexual deviants !!!

As for the 6 mil I think you mean to say a lawyer told her she could get that money, not that she was actually offered that money.

So the novelist + a reporter who is essentially saying he has a large sexual appetite are the

Originally posted by inimalist
long history of people reporting this type of abuse against Strauss-Khan

I see.

inimalist
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Surely all men that have been married 3 times are sexual deviants !!!

As for the 6 mil I think you mean to say a lawyer told her she could get that money, not that she was actually offered that money.

So the novelist + a reporter who is essentially saying he has a large sexual appetite are the



I see.

you convinced me, lol

/ffs

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by jaden101
http://www.firstpost.com/world/the-sordid-sexual-history-of-dominique-strauss-kahn-10581.html

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2072205,00.html

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/with-history-of-sexual-slip-ups-strauss-kahn-arrest-raises-questions/article2026021/

Neither of those mention any actual sexual assaults though except for the novelist.

I do however agree that after reading all of that I see he's got the markings of a megalomaniac who's used to pushing. Seems to me he's been successful sufficient times that this one time he may have pushed too hard.

Will have to see how the trial plays out.

jaden101
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Neither of those mention any actual sexual assaults though except for the novelist.

I do however agree that after reading all of that I see he's got the markings of a megalomaniac who's used to pushing. Seems to me he's been successful sufficient times that this one time he may have pushed too hard.

Will have to see how the trial plays out.

I never said anything about other sexual assaults...I said his sexual deviancy has been getting covered up for years...And those articles back that up. At best many of his actions would've had him fired from any normal job several times over.

Lets say that for now the man clearly has boundary issues and doesn't know when to take know for an answer...He clearly has an animalistic nature when it comes to sexual desires that outweighs his ability to control himself within the bounds of socially acceptable behaviour.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by jaden101
I never said anything about other sexual assaults...I said his sexual deviancy has been getting covered up for years...And those articles back that up. At best many of his actions would've had him fired from any normal job several times over.

Lets say that for now the man clearly has boundary issues and doesn't know when to take know for an answer...He clearly has an animalistic nature when it comes to sexual desires that outweighs his ability to control himself within the bounds of socially acceptable behaviour.

The confusion is from your post quoting my post which was a reply to inimalist claiming a string of sexual assault accusations, so I thought you were stepping in for him to provide that string of sexual assaults that he mentioned but did not produce.

I agree with your points.

jaden101
I'm not saying it's without the bounds of possibility that he could've been set up...I just don't think this is how it would've been done.

I do agree though that there will be a huge amount of people happy to see this happen...Whether it was set up or not. He's not a popular man in many circles in France.

He's obviously got serious issues though and clearly the behaviour isn't out of the ordinary given his previous questionable actions.

inimalist
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
The confusion is from your post quoting my post which was a reply to inimalist claiming a string of sexual assault accusations, so I thought you were stepping in for him to provide that string of sexual assaults that he mentioned but did not produce.

I agree with your points.

I guess it depends on how you define a "string"

Trintane Banon, Piroska Nagy and now this maid.

not to mention, soliciting sex from a reporter for an interview is actually a form of sexual assault... so that leaves 3 cases prior to this one, and this one... all in 10 years...

plus, huge evidence that he has an inappropriate sexual appetite (Nagy was a subordinate who felt pressured into the affair), and he is twice divorced. You are right, the divorces prove nothing... except that he couldnt hold together a marriage, and one of the most common reasons for this is infidelity.

what evidence of a plot against him was there again?

or, the hotel video? that is an entire fabrication? the alleged victim is a fantastic actor who called a friend in tears minutes after the assault?

like, dont get me wrong, innocent until proven guilty, but this "ooooh, he is powerful, no way he could have done it, its a set up" is not consistent with any evidence you have presented so far, and rests on the idea that someone might benefit from it.

like, if the DNA evidence comes back positive, will that be enough to convince you? or is the conspiracy so deep they have his sperm on file?

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
I guess it depends on how you define a "string"

Trintane Banon, Piroska Nagy and now this maid.

not to mention, soliciting sex from a reporter for an interview is actually a form of sexual assault... so that leaves 3 cases prior to this one, and this one... all in 10 years...

plus, huge evidence that he has an inappropriate sexual appetite (Nagy was a subordinate who felt pressured into the affair), and he is twice divorced. You are right, the divorces prove nothing... except that he couldnt hold together a marriage, and one of the most common reasons for this is infidelity.

what evidence of a plot against him was there again?

or, the hotel video? that is an entire fabrication? the alleged victim is a fantastic actor who called a friend in tears minutes after the assault?

like, dont get me wrong, innocent until proven guilty, but this "ooooh, he is powerful, no way he could have done it, its a set up" is not consistent with any evidence you have presented so far, and rests on the idea that someone might benefit from it.

like, if the DNA evidence comes back positive, will that be enough to convince you? or is the conspiracy so deep they have his sperm on file?

You probably shouldn't be sarcastic as you are the one that made a claim and is now resorting to grasping at straws to back it up.

Originally posted by inimalist
you... you do know there is a long history of people reporting this type of abuse against Strauss-Khan, yes?

"this type of abuse" ? Sexual abuse? How many reported sexual abuse against him? The novelist. That is all. Everything else in your post was either consensual, or harassment. Your claim that there is a long history of sexual abuses was incorrect.

Now that I cleared up why you shouldn't be sarcastic, I want to say I do agree that he's looking mighty guilty right about now having read all of those articles. All of this stuff wasn't reported where I live so all I had to go by was his general publicity of a ladies man and a powerful man with lots of enemies, so you can understand why I would be inclined to believe there's more to the story than meets the eye.

inimalist
lol, that is a strange moral calculus you are doing:

its abuse, but it isn't abusive enough

lol, fine, he has a history of sexual abuse of which this is the most serious case, does this satisfy your demarcation of which type of assaulting women is ok?

I'm also going to take a leap here and guess you dont know much about the psychology of women who have been assaulted, and why it can be almost impossible to get them to come forward... prove me wrong, i suppose (not that Im claiming any specific expertise...)

Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
All of this stuff wasn't reported where I live so all I had to go by was his general publicity of a ladies man and a powerful man with lots of enemies, so you can understand why I would be inclined to believe there's more to the story than meets the eye.

no, I cant. I have a hard time understanding how people can believe incredible things with no evidence at all. Im not being sarcastic here, conspiratorial thinking makes no sense to me

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, that is a strange moral calculus you are doing:

its abuse, but it isn't abusive enough

lol, fine, he has a history of sexual abuse of which this is the most serious case, does this satisfy your demarcation of which type of assaulting women is ok?

I'm also going to take a leap here and guess you dont know much about the psychology of women who have been assaulted, and why it can be almost impossible to get them to come forward... prove me wrong, i suppose

I was under the impression that all of us have the moral calculus that abuse varies in degree. I was under the impression that that's why calling a woman a b*tch, coming on to her or raping her are punished differently by the law. Must've been wrong though.

You clearly said this type of abuse has been reported against him for a long time. This type of abuse = prosecutable sexual abuse. You were wrong. Instead of wasting time trying to save face just accept that you were wrong, and read my point that I agree he fits the bill of someone who might eventually push too far.

As for women not coming forward, I am well aware of that, which is what peaked my curiosity when you said there was a long history of accusations. I was like "damn these french women are awesome for beating back the shame and fear of public scrutiny!". Sadly though, you were incorrect.

dadudemon
Wow. And the information I got is that she waited a two days to report this...I had no idea she reported it, instantly.

It would be different if she waited a couple of days after: after she found out who it was she "magically" claims to now have been assaulted. (Meaning, there is a strong possibility that she didn't report until after she found out his was "upper class" because she thought she could get some money.)

That's not the case, at all.

I'm pretty sure the FBI has several profiles for "accusers" just trying to make a buck or get fame. I was reading (as part of homework we had) about several profiles they have on women crying wolf in rape and how it was much more common than once thought...but still so rare that it really doesn't affect the bottom line. There should be tell-tale signs of monetary or fame motivations from this lady that should fit those profiles, quite well. It does not appear to fit most of those, at the moment. There's still the "fame" portion that cannot be ruled out.

There's also the possibility that it was pre-meditated and she came onto him but due to his sexual aggression, he can't really make that case.

Anyway, we can play "armchair quarterback" all we want. We really don't know with a super surety what's going on. The DNA evidence on the floor proves nothing unless he was claiming that he did not have sex with her, at all.

inimalist
lol, alright, fine, in your world, using one's power to pressure a subordinate into a sexual affair is not only forgivable, but shouldn't count as a history of sexual abuse. Pressuring a reporter into sex for an interview, not really abuse.

jeez, say hi to your wife for me

dadudemon
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, alright, fine, in your world, using one's power to pressure a subordinate into a sexual affair is not only forgivable, but shouldn't count as a history of sexual abuse. Pressuring a reporter into sex for an interview, not really abuse.

jeez, say hi to your wife for me


I'd like to point out that this post was not at me, but at Wickerman's...just in case people confused that. I think the dude is most likely guilty and he almost has a clear past of sexual predation. It just looks like you were posting at me but the timestamps reveal a different story of "at the same time" posting.

jaden101
Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd like to point out that this post was not at me, but at Wickerman's...just in case people confused that. I think the dude is most likely guilty and he almost has a clear past of sexual predation. It just looks like you were posting at me but the timestamps reveal a different story of "at the same time" posting.

Nice cover up there you dirty rapist.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
lol, alright, fine, in your world, using one's power to pressure a subordinate into a sexual affair is not only forgivable, but shouldn't count as a history of sexual abuse. Pressuring a reporter into sex for an interview, not really abuse.

jeez, say hi to your wife for me

Man, seriously, this is ridiculous, why would you stoop so low just to save face instead of admitting to being wrong?

You claimed that the type of sexual abuse allegations he is claiming now have been claimed frequently in the past as well. That is simply not the case.

I obviously don't endorse or condone harassment of any kind, and am in fact the first guy to call my friends out when they're being misogynists. The simple fact that I called you out for being incorrect regarding the long line of sexual abuse allegations similar to the one he is facing now is no reason to assume I condone harassment, and I honestly don't see how anyone could jump to that conclusion.

Obviously, as I've mentioned before, I think that he is a very bad guy, I think that men very often push TOO far under the guise of sexual appetite and "just being friendly", and the abuse of power and influence disgusts me. That being said, you were wrong in your statement, just admit it.

Liberator
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13455484

Looks like the IMF are already moving on, Strauss-Kahn has resigned from his post. I think his trial is today, or at least, he is making a court appearance.

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by Liberator
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13455484

Looks like the IMF are already moving on, Strauss-Kahn has resigned from his post. I think his trial is today, or at least, he is making a court appearance.

What I heard while making coffee was that he will be moved to house arrest in his daughter's NY residence, is not allowed to leave NY, will be electronically monitored and the case would be put on hold for months while both sides gather evidence.

inimalist
Originally posted by ~The Wickerman~
Man, seriously, this is ridiculous, why would you stoop so low just to save face instead of admitting to being wrong?

You claimed that the type of sexual abuse allegations he is claiming now have been claimed frequently in the past as well. That is simply not the case.

just to clear up, I did admit I was "wrong"

not really that I was wrong, just that you and I have differing opinions of what a history of abuse is.

If you don't consider the things listed as sexual abuse, there isn't much I can say other than sarcasm, but up above I clarified that:

Originally posted by inimalist
lol, fine, he has a history of sexual abuse of which this is the most serious case

don't get butthurt over a little sarcasm. You seem to be the one who was determined to say these things weren't abuse or weren't bad enough to consider abuse, and on that point we disagree. However, I certainly did admit that he doesn't have a string of people accusing him of rape, just highly inappropriate sexual misconduct where he abuses his position of power to force women into uncomfortable positions. 4 times in 10 years.

In my world, that is a string of sexual abuse. Would you be more satisfied if I called it a string of sexual misconduct?

~The Wickerman~
Originally posted by inimalist
don't get butthurt over a little sarcasm. You seem to be the one who was determined to say these things weren't abuse or weren't bad enough to consider abuse, and on that point we disagree. However, I certainly did admit that he doesn't have a string of people accusing him of rape, just highly inappropriate sexual misconduct where he abuses his position of power to force women into uncomfortable positions. 4 times in 10 years.

In my world, that is a string of sexual abuse. Would you be more satisfied if I called it a string of sexual misconduct?

A string of sexual misconduct accusations is absolutely correct, and again, I agree that the types of harassment he's been accused of are a form of abuse, but not "this type of abuse" which was your wording. "This type of abuse" = rape, which is quite different from simple sexual misconduct.

inimalist
which was my wording in one post that I have now clarified at least twice....

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.