Weiners.

[JCC]

Dude I don't think being expected not to send illicit photos to women and have sexually explicit conversations with them online while married and lying to your wife about it for years is a 'ridiculous' standard. Most people manage it. If you had a wife doing that shit to you, you would just be like 'oh well, nobody's perfect'? Besides which, this isn't really about my view or your view of the scandal, but the realpolitik of the situation. For a family values country like the US, this is damaging. Especially for the female vote.

[Grausamkeit]

A lot marriages survive infidelity, it should be between the person and their spouse, not the whole nation.

Plus, as Saya pointed out earlier, other politicians have done far worse with little or no outcry.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by JCC

Dude I don't think being expected not to send illicit photos to women and have sexually explicit conversations with them online while married and lying to your wife about it for years is a 'ridiculous' standard. Most people manage it. If you had a wife doing that shit to you, you would just be like 'oh well, nobody's perfect'? Besides which, this isn't really about my view or your view of the scandal, but the realpolitik of the situation. For a family values country like the US, this is damaging. Especially for the female vote.

If they never met, I don't see how this is any worse than someone leaking his porn stash. And he said his wife knew about it, just didn't know that he lied about that particular photo on twitter.

Although again, if the twitter girl really didn't solicit it thats a huge problem.

[JCC]

He is a politician. His public life comes under scrutiny, it is par for the course, especially in a generation like today's where personality is so important to a politician's success.

f they never met, I don't see how this is any worse than someone leaking his porn stash

It's kind of difficult to explain but directly interacting with a person like that in a sexual way is more intimate than a detached activity like watching porn.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by JCC

He is a politician. His public life comes under scrutiny, it is par for the course, especially in a generation like today's where personality is so important to a politician's success.

I know thats the way it works, but whether that is right is another matter. Besides, this is about as private life as you can get.

It's kind of difficult to explain but directly interacting with a person like that in a sexual way is more intimate than a detached activity like watching porn.

You have the full consent of whoever you're interacting with, but its just all text, maybe a few pictures, and no monetary coercion issues. He isn't blowing a lot of money into phone sex, strippers or hardcore porn. He's just getting off with the fantasy that is presented to him by someone he'll never meet, for free.

It can feel pretty intimate, if you do it with a partner when you're apart or someone you really care for, but most people have a detachment feeling about it. When I first got the internet it seemed to be nothing but IRC chats that could be on any topic but definitely will attract people looking for "A/S/L? Wanna cyber?", and on ICQ when you could look for friends in your age group, I'd say most of my friend requests were from people looking for it.

[JCC]

Maybe I'm just an old romantic but I could never do something like that across my girlfriend, I'd just see it as fundamentally disrespectful.

[Saya]

I think its disrespectful, and I wouldn't do it to a partner or like it if they did it without at least asking if I'm okay with it first, but honestly I think I'd be more horrified to find a copy of "Girls Gone Wild" than steamy chat logs.

[Saya]

OMG Versus just texted me a picture and you can see his weiner poking out of a blanket!

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...slacey/002.jpg

[Versus]

I have no problem with posting pictures of my junk, actually. I just assume that g.net wouldn't appreciate my amazing boner like I do.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Versus

I have no problem with posing pictures of my junk, actually. I just assume that g.net wouldn't appreciate my amazing boner like I do.

I appreciate your amazing boner, sir.

[Grausamkeit]

Originally Posted by Saya

OMG Versus just texted me a picture and you can see his weiner poking out of a blanket!

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...slacey/002.jpg

That is an awesome weiner! I can just imagine it going down the back of my throat...

[Versus]

Joking aside, I think it would make even you blush. It's that great.

[Grausamkeit]

Wulfeh Teh GRate does not blush at weiners!

[CptSternn]

Originally Posted by Saya

I'm tired but not able to sleep, so I'm paranoid that what I type sounds Catch-ish, but I'm skeptical if Weiner could make the Dems more leftist. There are issues with multi party systems, true, but I feel with the way American system is that Dems are centrists with some leftists or left centrists, whereas Republicans are balls to the wall right wing, I was looking up stuff about Romney earlier and I saw a news article saying he was getting flack for believing in global warming. Its like if you have an ounce of sanity, you'd be a Democrat, and thats the criteria. if you're Republican you're not allowed to believe science or common sense or anything that goes against right wing Bible thumping nut jobs or corporations. The Democrat's sin is not going far enough, that's true, but because they allow a diversity of opinion and political belief, its going to be very hard for someone to whip them all to the left.

I have said this before. There is no 'left' in American politics. The dems are not left. They are centrist if anything, I would even say a bit right of centre. So you basically have two parties - the far right and the no so far right in America.

Bernie Sanders is the only true leftist in American politics and he has no official party. They need to open up the field for a more diverse base.

There needs to be five or six parties AT LEAST running for office, not just the two. Outside of a few SOCIAL issues they never disagree on main of the main issues and thats why there is no real change.

[CptSternn]

Check out this boner. Very flexible and professional...

http://tinyurl.com/6gxmeoc

[Grausamkeit]

Nice boner, heh. ^

[MissCheyenne]

Politics aside, I think it's a dangerous assumption for anyone to make that their private business is going to stay private. In this glorious age of technology, it's easy to work out what people are up to, who they see, speak to and interact with on a daily basis. Assuming anything is going to stay private unless you take extreme measures to ensure it does is just stupid. People think nothing of spalshing things all over facebook, twitter and the like, leaving their life open to scrutiny from anyone who decides to take an interest.

[Grausamkeit]

That's why I think people should stay away from facebook, twitter and keep their myspace on 'private'(you can also set it to not accept friend requests). Also, adding co-workers, annoying family members and people who just generally can't keep their traps shut is a bad idea.

[Ben Lahnger]

Originally Posted by Saya

I know thats the way it works, but whether that is right is another matter. Besides, this is about as private life as you can get.

Viewing porn alone is the ultimate private act. When you engage in an illicit behavior with another person, it's only private as long as the two of you both agree to continue to keep it private. Once one party decides to make it public (as the women here did), it's no longer private. There is no right or wrong to that. Since Weiner was violating the trust of his marriage, he hasn't got a leg to stand on complaining that the women he was sexting to violated his trust.

And the rest, whether you like it or not, whether you think it's right or not, is politics 101 in the USA. Don't do something scandalous and the public never has to hear you've done something scandalous.

Originally Posted by Saya

You have the full consent of whoever you're interacting with, but its just all text, maybe a few pictures, and no monetary coercion issues.

Actually, every time a public figure engages in this kind of activity, they expose themselves to the possibility of coercion. What if one of the women had decided to try to blackmail him instead of just going public with the info?

I'm okay with someone wanting to engage in sexting, if that trips their trolley (although, in this age, since no text message or email is actually any more private than a post card, I wouldn't). If they are married, then the violation of trust is an issue between the two married parties, and nobody else. But if you want to engage in that kind of behavior, don't enter a life of public service. Just don't. It's not going to work. These things always come out.

[Despanan]

This is why I plan to sexually harass people through a handle when I become a public figure.

incidentally, if someone named Nanapsed asks you for pictures of your naughty bits it's best to just give them to him.

I hear he's staggeringly handsome.

[Ben Lahnger]

Oh, and now the reports are out that since this activity has become common knowledge, Weiner has engaged in texting with a 17 year-old girl. So reporters and parents are focusing in on this to see if this is a link to any further illicit behavior.

It appears that the content of the texts is innocent enough, and it certainly is within the realm of normal political behavior to respond and correspond with children in an official capacity. But it has given people another reason to go digging for dirt.

And from this point forward, he shouldn't be surprised that everything he does is put under the microscope.

"Nanapsed"? Yeah, that's covert enough! LMAO!

[Grausamkeit]

No, everyone should send their naughty pictures to Noomflow! As long as they are olde enough to buy alcohol.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Viewing porn alone is the ultimate private act. When you engage in an illicit behavior with another person, it's only private as long as the two of you both agree to continue to keep it private. Once one party decides to make it public (as the women here did), it's no longer private. There is no right or wrong to that. Since Weiner was violating the trust of his marriage, he hasn't got a leg to stand on complaining that the women he was sexting to violated his trust.

Was he violating the trust of his marriage though? He said she knew about the sexting, just didn't know he lied about the twitter pic. I could be wrong but I haven't heard that his wife has said anything so far. Admitting to a somewhat open marriage though would be political suicide, so even if she was fine with it I don't think she'll ever say so.

I just don't see why this should hurt the women's vote unless he really did sexually harass the woman by sending that picture unsolicited. This may hurt the "Anything outside absolute monogamy is evil" vote, though.

Also, what if he went to a strip club? Thats more intimate than sexting, the person is right there in front of you naked as the day she was born.

And the rest, whether you like it or not, whether you think it's right or not, is politics 101 in the USA. Don't do something scandalous and the public never has to hear you've done something scandalous.

Actually, I'm starting to think that if Weiner was a woman he'd be able to play the victim card, like when a celebrity's sex videos are released without their permission. "It was private! I feel betrayed and humiliated!" And then on tv we'd get the lectures to young women the dangerous of sexting because men will use it to hurt you. And I think the only reason this is scandalous is because people like to consume other people's dirty laundry.

I'm okay with someone wanting to engage in sexting, if that trips their trolley (although, in this age, since no text message or email is actually any more private than a post card, I wouldn't). If they are married, then the violation of trust is an issue between the two married parties, and nobody else. But if you want to engage in that kind of behavior, don't enter a life of public service. Just don't. It's not going to work. These things always come out.

I think people who serve in politics are entitled to some amount of privacy.

[Ben Lahnger]

Originally Posted by Saya

Also, what if he went to a strip club? Thats more intimate than sexting, the person is right there in front of you naked as the day she was born.

Again, if you're involved in an illicit activity which involves one or more other human beings, and one of them chooses to take info about your activity to the press, you're screwed. All it would take would be a stripper or another patron taking a cell phone picture of him there. And whether some of us think he ought to have a right to be there or not doesn't matter. In this instance, he certainly would have no claim to privacy as he is in a public place.

Originally Posted by Saya

I think people who serve in politics are entitled to some amount of privacy.

You might think that. Doesn't make it so. Don't seek a position of public service if you want some amount of privacy, because you're never going to get it.

And when you do something private with one or more human beings, any one of you can decide at any time that it no longer is going to be private. Once one of the other people lets the cat out of the bag, nobody can say they think that ought to be private, because one of the consenting parties has determined it should be public. It's a moot point and an irrelevant debate at that moment, as is saying people shouldn't have the reaction they have.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Ben Lahnger

Again, if you're involved in an illicit activity which involves one or more other human beings, and one of them chooses to take info about your activity to the press, you're screwed. All it would take would be a stripper or another patron taking a cell phone picture of him there. And whether some of us think he ought to have a right to be there or not doesn't matter. In this instance, he certainly would have no claim to privacy as he is in a public place.



You might think that. Doesn't make it so. Don't seek a position of public service if you want some amount of privacy, because you're never going to get it.

And when you do something private with one or more human beings, any one of you can decide at any time that it no longer is going to be private. Once one of the other people lets the cat out of the bag, nobody can say they think that ought to be private, because one of the consenting parties has determined it should be public. It's a moot point and an irrelevant debate at that moment, as is saying people shouldn't have the reaction they have.

Here's the hypocrisy, representational democracy says you may vote for any representative you wish, and apparently most of his constituents do not think he should resign. If he did nothing criminal and they stand behind him, then it should be fine.

But the media and those who consume it really love to know what goes on in other people's bedrooms, and claim "They're a public figure!", blast it on tv, give you a quick update about Syria before ten minutes of Weiner time. I guess I shouldn't expect less from a country that polices what goes on in the bedroom of private citizens, eh?