Ariana Grande groped by a priest on live TV

[Haich]

She looked incredibly uncomfortable and he was clearly digging his fingers into her sideboob. I mean, she's a performer so we can never expect modesty from her. Sex sells and she's complicit in what she wears and who she allows to be around her.

He had no right to touch and embrace her like that and I condemn his predatory actions but I also condemn British media for not calling him out on it. I literally heard of it on the internet and I feel this is a clear example of how certain individuals get away with unnecessary touching.

I've had this happen to me before, where overly friendly men feel the need to pat the lower back or squeeze your side for a friendly hug and sure, not all cases are perverted but some are and others don't really seem to clock on. I mean if she made a big deal about him touching her, she'd probably be accused of overreacting and demonizing him.

Men and women really not to stop passing heavy handedness as friendly contact. Not everyone likes to be touched by strangers and it's inappropriate. A simple shaking of hands is where the line needs to be drawn...

I remember we had a teacher who would hug students. This was in secondary school and everyone would say oh he's a hugger he's a cool guy, but looking back, clearly he was getting kicks from hugging female students.

What we allow will continue, draw lines and obey those lines is what I say...

 

[The Zone]

Louis Farrakhan was edited out of the videos by NBC and ABC via cropping so it would not be an issue when they threw their spin on the news. I haven't really sat down to watch the whole thing yet, but Clinton is hilarious in a creepy way with his drooling eyes. What a mad, mad world we live in.

 

[Aero]

He got 'called out all over the media, sued and fired' before there was even evidence and a proper trial. Wow... how awesome.

As to the single photo used as evidence, he could have just been lowering his arm behind her and accidentally brushed against her at the time it was taken. It was not conclusive at all, and it certainly didn't show or prove he was 'groping her butt' as was claimed. Applying this logic to the same photo, the other woman could have accused TS of groping her because TS's hand is behind the woman. See how that works?

First of all your claim that there was no evidence is blatantly false. It's called eyewitness testimony. You may not like it, but it's considered evidence. You are just appealing to pity for the poor misogynists of the world.

If we apply your logic every man or woman can get away with touching whoever they want. No Witnesses = free for all for the rapists. The better trade-off is trying to apply good judgment and believing the right witnesses.

 

[Aero]

She isn't speaking up about this assault because she's afraid. And the media is totally complicit. They reported his apology and gave it some softball title. Last time I checked overly friendly didn't include groping boobs.

There should be a puke emoji

 

[Aero]

I just read about the eyewitness accounts in the TS case, so that's my mistake. Up until now, my impression was that the only evidence was the single photo. The only credible witness I read was the bodyguard. There's no way the photographer taking the picture could have seen what his hand was doing. None of these people - even TS herself - spoke up or stopped the event during the alleged groping.

In what world are the victims not credible witnesses? If your out in public and someone walks up and grabs your private parts. That's sexual assault and chances are your account will be the only evidence. If you think people should just be allowed to do that, you might be a sicko.



The law in the U.S. is innocent until proven guilty, so evidence of some sort is a must. Here's WHY that is so important -

College student sues woman for $6m over false r*pe allegation that destroyed his life
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12081636

Woman who made false r*pe claim gets 1 year in jail
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/woman-made-false-r*pe-claim-year-jail-57361904

Rolling Stone to Pay $1.65 Million to Fraternity Over Discredited r*pe Story
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/13/business/media/r*pe-uva-rolling-stone-frat.html

Girl made false accusation of r*pe after her ex-boyfriend rejected her
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/28/girl-made-false-accusation-r*pe-ex-boyfriend-rejected/

The rush to judgment and condemnation via news and social media is dead wrong, and that was my point.

You are talking about criminal law. And I agree not to rush to judgment. The case I brought up wasn't a rush to judgment though. There was a civil trial and the DJ lost.

Some witness lie. But be realistic. 91 women have accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault. There is a line you have to draw when there is a clear pattern of behavior.

 

[Aero]

What I made clear in my first post was that the DJ was condemned via news/social media BEFORE the trial and evidence. That's the part you are missing.



No, I will not condemn/convict until evidence is presented in trial. There are WAY too many questions that need to be answered by both sides. Do I think Weinstein is an utter disgusting letch? Yes, that much is clear by his own admission. Did some women consent to get good roles? Yes, I believe so. Did some sign nondisclosures and take a payout? Yes, that is a fact. For those 2 groups, they have already received their chosen form of justice. Movie roles or hush money - they agreed to the deal and therefore waived their rights to publicly whine after the fact. The rest remains to be sorted in court.

Bottom line: Every woman involved should have called the authorities and gone to court instead of announcing it over social media. The media feeding frenzy should NEVER have happened. By choosing to go this route, they left themselves open to valid questions about their intentions and agenda.

Except the public did have the evidence. That's that part you aren't getting. There were no grand mysteries solved at the trial in question. Taylor Swift said he groped her and that's that. Why would she lie?

It's funny watching you talk about justice. Because it seems like you don't want any justice. Having a reasonable doubt over the Harvey Weinstein case says it all. You know, I wish every case had an orgy of evidence. But that never happens. If we went by that standard nobody would ever be convicted of any crimes.

 

[free2018]

They had to turn it into a dark ritual. That's what they like: humiliation and scandal. And then her ex-boyfriend just " passed away". Rest in Peace Mac Miller.

 

[TempestOfTempo]

She looked incredibly uncomfortable and he was clearly digging his fingers into her sideboob. I mean, she's a performer so we can never expect modesty from her. Sex sells and she's complicit in what she wears and who she allows to be around her.

He had no right to touch and embrace her like that and I condemn his predatory actions but I also condemn British media for not calling him out on it. I literally heard of it on the internet and I feel this is a clear example of how certain individuals get away with unnecessary touching.

I've had this happen to me before, where overly friendly men feel the need to pat the lower back or squeeze your side for a friendly hug and sure, not all cases are perverted but some are and others don't really seem to clock on. I mean if she made a big deal about him touching her, she'd probably be accused of overreacting and demonizing him.

Men and women really not to stop passing heavy handedness as friendly contact. Not everyone likes to be touched by strangers and it's inappropriate. A simple shaking of hands is where the line needs to be drawn...

I remember we had a teacher who would hug students. This was in secondary school and everyone would say oh he's a hugger he's a cool guy, but looking back, clearly he was getting kicks from hugging female students.

What we allow will continue, draw lines and obey those lines is what I say...

"I've had this happen to me before, where overly friendly men feel the need to pat the lower back or squeeze your side for a friendly hug and sure, not all cases are perverted but some are and others don't really seem to clock on."
Imo, the pat on the back/shoulder and the side squeezed hug and etc. are swerves I utilize for NOT engaging in the big
PDA greetings/good byes that many people engage in. So for him to use a tactic that minimizes physical contact between people and still get his grope on..... I would have to say it really seems intentional.