Oh my... this is a typical case of projection, where one side dreams that the other side has what they lack. I think neither of them have "class consciousness". Why would you say that some have class consciousness and others don't? Working class person isn't aware that they are working class and therefore are under different conditions than the capitalists?

And how can "class consciousness" help prevent abuses? — Agustino

First, I am not projecting -- I am working class. I know of what I speak. Second, some people have class consciousness and other people don't. Not that difficult a concept, is it? Third, absolutely -- a lot of working class people (especially in the United States) have "false class consciousness". A couple of examples:

"In America, anybody can be whatever they want." False. Most people in the real world exceed the accomplishments of their parents only to limited degree. Children may get more education than their parents; they may enter a skilled trade like medical technology, oil drilling, teaching k-12, accounting, and so on; they may make twice as much as their parents earned, but none of that lifts them far above the accomplishments of their parents. Most people's parents were working class, and most of those children will remain working class.

"I own my home, I went to college, I have a professional job, I have season tickets to the symphony. I'm not working class." Some people own their own home. Most people share ownership with a mortgage company. Lots of people go to college and lot's of people have "professional jobs". Lots of workers have refined tastes. There are only a few professions which enable occupants to act like bourgeois people: physician, law partner, small business owner (having...100 to 200 employees, producing a high value product or service), tenured professor, senior pastor of a wealthy church, and the like.

Sure you are working class IF your wage or salary is tied to a job which you must perform in order to get paid... Doctors who own their own clinics have become bourgeoisie. Partners in a law firm have become bourgeoisie. Tenured professors are sort of bourgeoisie. Fat cat pastors of wealthy churches are merely parasites.

Thinking you are not working class when you have to go to work to get paid is FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS.

Workers who have class consciousness understand that individually they are powerless, and that in union they become strong. Uniting in labor solidarity won't make them rich, but it will protect them from egregious practices by employers. Class consciousness means understanding the difference between having to work for one's wages and living on accumulated riches.

Americans are tribal — Baden

I should note there are some honourable exceptions. A few writers on redstate.com (no bastion of liberalism!), for example, have been very critical of Trump's sexual misbehaviour and I presume there are liberal writers that properly hold Clinton to account. It does seem to be more the exception than the rule though, sadly.

bailiwick — unenlightened

:-O I never heard of this word.

Me and God are pretty close, but I know better than to try and tell Him how to run His bailiwick.

If that's your aim, you need to petition God, who will turn you down. — unenlightened

How do you know, have you already spoken to Him? :D

I suppose so, but then this is more of a way of limiting the damage that a bad person can cause instead of preventing it. — Agustino

If that's your aim, you need to petition God, who will turn you down.

There is a difficult balance to strike anyway, because given the chance, a student might use the power of threatened accusation - such things happen too. — unenlightened

Yes, but not around non-Western Eastern European countries lol. Here it's harder for the student to accuse the teacher, even with good reason. I suppose in some Western countries it's easier since it seems to be easier there for a woman to accuse falsely a man of rape, or for a student to accuse a teacher falsely, etc. - the pendulum has swung too far the other way.

As long as we can avoid 25 years of repeated abuse, we are making things a bit better, no? — unenlightened

I suppose so, but then this is more of a way of limiting the damage that a bad person can cause instead of preventing it.

Right, but when you're say the President, you can't really expect that your employee is going to report you - you pretty much control the power structure she could report you to, or at least you have greater leverage over it than she does. Even in the student-teacher case, a student can't really report the teacher to the Principal, because the teacher has greater leverage and authority with the Principal than the student - things could potentially turn out badly for the student that way. — Agustino

Yes. There is a difficult balance to strike anyway, because given the chance, a student might use the power of threatened accusation - such things happen too. So a president needs protection from malicious accusations. One does not want to undermine the power relation. So not the principal, but a sort of official gossip monger, who probably won't help you, but might help the next kid, or the one after that. As long as we can avoid 25 years of repeated abuse, we are making things a bit better, no?

That's up to him not me! Anyway, I'll pick up this convo again tomorrow.

Can I call @Michael by a nickname of my choice even though he says it's not his name? >:)

No I'm not. Stop being so uncharitable in your reading. Princesses should not have relationships with their servants, because they have immediate power over their lives. They don't have that power over the lives of commoners in general or other royals' servants. Clear now? — unenlightened

I wasn't being uncharitable. It just wasn't clear to me. You just talked in general about "power imbalance" and gave the examples of an employer and a doctor. My apologies if my example of royalty was clearly excluded by your comment.

Yes, dear, class consciousness. Capitalists have it -- why shouldn't workers benefit from it as well? — Bitter Crank

Oh my... this is a typical case of projection, where one side dreams that the other side has what they lack. I think neither of them have "class consciousness". Why would you say that some have class consciousness and others don't? Working class person isn't aware that they are working class and therefore are under different conditions than the capitalists?

And how can "class consciousness" help prevent abuses?

Cosby though, I thought was actually drugging and raping women though... I thought that other guy was just making use of the casting couch, not literally a serial rapist, just trading roles and stuff for sex, I wouldn't consider those things remotely similar. — Wosret

I don't consider them the same either.

Oh dear, class consciousness.... — Agustino

Yes, dear, class consciousness. Capitalists have it -- why shouldn't workers benefit from it as well?

It cannot be stopped entirely, but it can be helped to stop by having conduits for reporting and recording such incidents. — unenlightened

Right, but when you're say the President, you can't really expect that your employee is going to report you - you pretty much control the power structure she could report you to, or at least you have greater leverage over it than she does. Even in the student-teacher case, a student can't really report the teacher to the Principal, because the teacher has greater leverage and authority with the Principal than the student - things could potentially turn out badly for the student that way.

IF you want to be safe from the undesired advance, then something more than responsive court systems will be needed: What is needed are very strong employee class conscious unions that can collectively resist arbitrary and capricious actions of management — Bitter Crank

:-O Oh dear, class consciousness....

Cosby though, I thought was actually drugging and raping women though... I thought that other guy was just making use of the casting couch, not literally a serial rapist, just trading roles and stuff for sex, I wouldn't consider those things remotely similar.

This I understand but what you have explained can happen to anyone. I fail to see how it is specific to sexual harassment/and or abuse by people in the position of power. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Power differentials are ubiquitous, even if the differentials are not always as great as between the king and the serving wench. One can get fired for arbitrary and capricious reasons because the boss has more power than the employee. Sexual harassments occur for the same reason.

Not only are power differentials ubiquitous, but they are essential operating protocols in this world. The organization of power is not the topic, but it can't be separated from the topic of sexual harassment. Sexual behavior will always occur -- no matter what the behavior is -- in the context of power differentials.

Even if we develop responsive court systems that deal with sexual advances that persist after clear rejection to deal with the bold marauders in the corporate suites, power differentials will continue to exist in simple and exaggerated forms.

IF you want to be safe from the undesired advance, then something more than responsive court systems will be needed: What is needed are very strong employee class conscious unions that can collectively resist arbitrary and capricious actions of management. I don't know how much you will have to pitch overboard to take on strong class conscious unions, but if you want social change...

BTW, the reason strong class conscious unions are needed is that unionism is the best vehicle for the change in consciousness among all workers. If Hollywood actors and other workers in the crafts of illusion had a class conscious union, everyone in Tinsel Town would have a much clearer understanding of why Harvey Weinstein's behavior was unacceptable.

The same methods (strong class conscious unions) that prevent arbitrary and capricious firings also prevent sexually improper behavior.

Capeesh?

OK, fair enough, but I would have thought it obvious that seeing as many liberals (at least those old enough) voted for Clinton or at least supported him they would find it very difficult to admit they voted for or supported a (possible) rapist. Nobody voted for Weinstein or Cosby and their political affiliations are both much less well known (was Cosby even a liberal?) and much less important.

+ Some of your references relate to Trump vs Clinton, which is even more obvious. I feel sorry for anyone who feels the need to write an article on why conservatives and liberals cover for their own teams. Americans are tribal? Really? How curious...

Like, think about yourself. The first memories I have of my sexual desire aren't of some biological kind but rather I remember hearing around, in music, etc. that real grown up men have sex with women, so then I started to desire it. That's how I actually got to having that desire. Then over time I started to see that men who had sex with more women were admired more than those who didn't, so then I started to desire that too, because I thought that's what it takes to be a real man. I didn't learn all that myself now, that's what society taught me. I suppose that if I was left alone with no such messages, I would have had to wait until I actually fell in love or was biologically attracted to a woman and figure things out for myself from there on. But that's not how it happened. I was taught that these women are hot, these women are not hot, etc.

I doubt anyone else is confused — Baden

You are factually incorrect. Many people are confused about the same point.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/07/30/why_do_bill_and_hillary_clinton_still_get_a_pass_127590.html

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article108304112.html

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/05/yes-hillary-was-an-enabler-213919

https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1998/05/williams199805

http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/11/trumps-sexual-depravity-bad-bill-clintons-okay/

https://acculturated.com/bill-clinton-effect/

There are many other such article on Google. You are simply wrong when you think that nobody else is questioning why liberals give Bill Clinton a pass on credible allegations of rape. On the contrary, many thoughtful people have noted this point. Some partisan, some not.

If partisan politics explained it, Cosby would not have been attacked by the left the way he was. The contrast between Cosby and Clinton is striking. Partisan politics really doesn't explain it at all.

The root cause is biology. Chinese emperors knew that. Hence Eunuchs. — Baden

No, the Chinese emperors needed Eunuchs because they themselves had 100 concubines. When you have that, you naturally cause other human beings who have a sexual biological function to become envious of you and try to imitate you because you show them that you are Emperor and what distinguishes you from them is the presence of the women. So that plays on the natural sexual desire and twists it in unnatural ways. So obviously you want eunuchs around, who have no natural sexual desire, so there's nothing to twist and create rivalry.

Yes, biology does play a role, but it is only aided by culture that it can produce such desires. Why do you attribute a sufficient role to biology alone to produce such effects of conflict and rivalry, and hence sin and immorality?

Well, I think that since something like this is becoming such a big deal, it is probably a sign of its decline anyway. If everyone was doing it, and it was the norm, no one would be saying anything, unless they planned to bring down all of hollywood, never work again, or were writing about it in their autobiographies after they were already has beens like people have already been doing for decades. Since people can be singled out, it implies that they are becoming rarer, or something of a bygone age.

I doubt anyone else is confused but if you want to go around scratching your head about stuff everyone else understands, feel free.

Why did the liberals abandon Cosby and Weinstein, but not hold Bill Clinton accountable? That is the question. I find it curious. — fishfry

Political partisanship. That's the third time I've answered. Why is it difficult for you?

but rather that which puts those desires in our mind in the first place. — Agustino

The root cause is biology. Chinese emperors knew that. Hence Eunuchs.

So if I have power do I just spontaneously start having desires to rape women and such? :s — Agustino

Do I become, as Nietzsche said, a "blonde beast" going around and pillaging things?

And Baden's answer is that the left gives Bill a pass because the right gives Trump a pass — Agustino

That doesn't make sense, even as a joke. The Clinton allegations are over 20 years old and go back to his time as governor of Arkansas.

Why did the liberals abandon Cosby and Weinstein, but not hold Bill Clinton accountable? That is the question. I find it curious.

I'm not against you in principle by the way, Agu. In fact, I'm on your side but you are not demonstrating how power and desire won't work to achieve their goals in sexual beings such as we are. — Baden

So if I have power do I just spontaneously start having desires to rape women and such? :s Presumably I must have already had those desires, and the presence of power merely allowed them to manifest no? That's why we have to attack the root cause, which isn't power and desire, but rather that which puts those desires in our mind in the first place.

Stop confusing causation and correlation. Even as a joke. — Baden

>:O

And Baden's answer is that the left gives Bill a pass because the right gives Trump a pass - retroactive justification — Agustino

Stop confusing causation and correlation. Even as a joke.

I'm not against you in principle by the way, Agu. In fact, I'm on your side but you are not demonstrating how power and desire won't work to achieve their goals in sexual beings such as we are.

EDIT: Cross posted. I'll read your latest then.