Celebrity Sexual Harassment Charge Sheet

[pErvinalia]

At least he didn't ask to see the black hole..

[JimC]

That's so rude in Russian that Russian astronomers have to use "Collapsed Stellar Object" instead...

[Tero]

In America, you look at stars thru the telescope. In Soviet Russia the KGB looks at your black hole.

I gotta work on that...

[Sean Hayden]

yeah

[L'Emmerdeur]

Just can't help misrepresenting, eh?

Dr. Allers said her experience was public and didn’t rise to the level of assault, but that it did show Tyson was capable of some “creepy behavior.”

[source]

The Mary Sue, too, I guess -

You guess incorrectly. Nowhere in that article does Dr. Allers accuse deGrasse Tyson of sexual assault. Nor does the author of the article make such an accusation on her behalf.

Do you even read these articles? The lead says it was "Sexual Misconduct" and the "sexual misconduct" was "touching without consent" (AKA "assault and battery") and the article calls it inappropriate and sexual misconduct. So, an assault which is sexual misconduct is what? Sexual and assault. Sexual assault.

Bullshit. You're playing with legal terms that have specific meanings inconsistent with your characterization. The defining aspect of the accusation of assault and battery is the unlawful nature of the actions.

Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

[West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2.]

Further:

The types of acts that fall into the category of assaults can vary widely, but typically an assault requires an overt or direct act that would put the reasonable person in fear for their safety. Spoken words alone will not be enough of an act to constitute an assault unless the offender backs them up with an act or actions that put the victim in reasonable fear of imminent harm.

[FindLaw]

Neither Dr. Allers nor the author of that article has accused deGrasse Tyson of unlawful behavior; Allers specifically denied it, the author specifically described it as 'inappropriate behavior,' and the title of the piece refers to 'sexual misconduct.' Neither claim deGrasse Tyson engaged in sexual assault. Inappropriate behavior and sexual misconduct are not necessarily unlawful and you doubling down on your misrepresentation of Allers and the Mary Sue author doesn't make it so.

The rest of your post is just you on your ridiculous soapbox expounding on how you think women should behave.

[Forty Two]

Just can't help misrepresenting, eh?

The Mary Sue, too, I guess -

You guess incorrectly. Nowhere in that article does Dr. Allers accuse deGrasse Tyson of sexual assault. Nor does the author of the article make such an accusation on her behalf.

Do you even read these articles? The lead says it was "Sexual Misconduct" and the "sexual misconduct" was "touching without consent" (AKA "assault and battery") and the article calls it inappropriate and sexual misconduct. So, an assault which is sexual misconduct is what? Sexual and assault. Sexual assault.

Bullshit. You're playing with legal terms that have specific meanings inconsistent with your characterization. The defining aspect of the accusation of assault and battery is the unlawful nature of the actions.

Two separate offenses against the person that when used in one expression may be defined as any unlawful and unpermitted touching of another. Assault is an act that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent, harmful, or offensive contact. The act consists of a threat of harm accompanied by an apparent, present ability to carry out the threat. Battery is a harmful or offensive touching of another.

[West's Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2.]

Further:

The types of acts that fall into the category of assaults can vary widely, but typically an assault requires an overt or direct act that would put the reasonable person in fear for their safety. Spoken words alone will not be enough of an act to constitute an assault unless the offender backs them up with an act or actions that put the victim in reasonable fear of imminent harm.

[FindLaw]

Neither Dr. Allers nor the author of that article has accused deGrasse Tyson of unlawful behavior; Allers specifically denied it, the author specifically described it as 'inappropriate behavior,' and the title of the piece refers to 'sexual misconduct.' Neither claim deGrasse Tyson engaged in sexual assault. Inappropriate behavior and sexual misconduct are not necessarily unlawful and you doubling down on your misrepresentation of Allers and the Mary Sue author doesn't make it so.

The rest of your post is just you on your ridiculous soapbox expounding on how you think women should behave.

The author described it as "sexual misconduct" and "touching without consent." A touching without consent is an assault (and battery). That's by definition. I never said anything was unlawful. I was describing what the article said. That's what it said.

I don't expound on how women should behave. They can behave any way they like. However, if a guy made the allegations Aller made about a woman touching his arm and tattoo, it would be laughable. Aller being a woman doesn't change that for me.

[L'Emmerdeur]

I know you have extreme difficulty seeing beyond your firmly held opinion, Forty Two, but that doesn't mean that your opinion equals reality.

One more source:

According to the United States Department of Justice, sexual assault is “any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient.” Sexual assault is basically an umbrella term that includes sexual activities such as rape, fondling, and attempted rape.

Before you leap in to exclaim that deGrasse Tyson 'fondled' Allers without her consent, note that it has a specific meaning in the context of sexual crimes.

"sexual fondling" means the touching of the private body parts of another person (including the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or buttocks) for the purpose of sexual gratification.

From the first source above, quoting an assistant district attorney who specializes in prosecuting sexual crimes:

Generally, sexual assault falls into one of three categories.

1. Penetration crimes
• Of a body part by another body part (i.e., penal penetration of mouth, anus, vagina)
• Of a body part by an object

2. Contact with genitalia, breast, buttocks, or other intimate body parts

3. Exposure of genitalia, breast, buttocks or other intimate body parts

You misrepresented both Allers and the author of the article. When I pointed that out, you apparently decided that you'd play lawyer. You're not as good at that as you think you are though.

Also,

Grown women griping about this?

Stop, just stop.

The above certainly appears to be expounding on how women should behave--they should stop, just stop griping about men's creepy behavior, according to you.

[L'Emmerdeur]

deleted

[DRSB]

Look, with a pussy-grabber as president, many things have become socially acceptable. I object to that!

[DRSB]

For Hermit: «Die Schweiz ist eine patriarchale Gesellschaft mit autoritären Strukturen»
https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/die-schweiz- ... ld.1442225

[Hermit]

For Hermit: «Die Schweiz ist eine patriarchale Gesellschaft mit autoritären Strukturen»
https://www.nzz.ch/zuerich/die-schweiz- ... ld.1442225

Thanks, DRSB. This may well be the best interview I have ever read or heard. Deeply probing questions by the interviewer, no evasions by the interviewee, totally focussed on the issue at hand at all times and no grandstanding or playing for effect on either side. Why can't we have more of those?

[DRSB]

More interesting reading for Hermit, on a different note: https://interaktiv.tagesanzeiger.ch/201 ... 6Tb4WaxYpg

[DRSB]

Everybody should be held equally accountable!

“The idea that God has got the Virgin Mary back to his pad, and she’s saying ‘I really must go,’ and he’s saying ‘baby, it’s cold outside’..

GOD WRONGFULLY IMPREGNATED TEENAGE VIRGIN MARY WITHOUT CONSENT SAYS MINNESOTA PROFESSOR

Minnesota psychology professor caught the attention of conservative pundits this week after tweeting that God impregnated the Virgin Mary without consent.

Eric Sprankle, Psy.D, an associate professor at the Minnesota State University, angered Fox News host Tucker Carlson and guest commentator Mark Steyn with his Monday comments.

He wrote: “The virgin birth story is about an all-knowing, all-powerful deity impregnating a human teen. There is no definition of consent that would include that scenario. Happy Holidays.”

He later added: “The biblical god regularly punished disobedience. The power difference (deity vs mortal) and the potential for violence for saying 'no' negates her 'yes.' To put someone in this position is an unethical abuse of power at best and grossly predatory at worst.”

The professor’s stance failed to impress during yesterday’s airing of Tucker Carlson Tonight, with the host and Steyn left fuming over what they called the “dismal” state of atheism in America. They didn’t appreciate Sprankle’s use of “Satanic ornaments” on his Christmas tree.

A Fox News article also pointed out that his bio included the line "Ave Satana," or “hail, Satan.”

“Fifty years ago, this kind of shallow banality would be something the province of a drunk undergraduate at three in the morning,” Steyn said when asked about the tweets.

“The idea that God has got the Virgin Mary back to his pad, and she’s saying ‘I really must go,’ and he’s saying ‘baby, it’s cold outside’...I miss the days when atheists were at least intelligent enough to take seriously what they were purporting to knock down,” he said.

Steyn continued: “The stupidity and banality and shallowness and reductiveness of this is a dismal comment on the state of atheism in America. They don’t seem to make the same kind of Ramadan jokes as they do Christmas jokes. It's odd that isn’t it; I wonder why that is, Tucker.”

But, Jeff Bezos?

https://www.newsweek.com/minnesota-eric ... Hl_Xn4sUuk

[Svartalf]

Technically, he's right, Jesus was begotten without mary's knowledge and she only learned about it after the fact.

[Forty Two]

According to the Bible, Mary arguably consented - after the Angel tells her she is chosen to become pregnant. Mary says "how can this be, since I am a virgin?" and then the Angel says that the holy spirit will overshadow her and a child will be conceived who will be holy and called "the Son of God." "Then Mary said, "Here am I, the servant of the Lord; let it be with me according to your word."" So, she is consenting "let it be me according to your word." Luke 1:26-38. And, since Jesus was "born" of a virgin, that means she was still a virgin after being impregnated and through birth - it's not rape unless she was penetrated. She, herself, also never claimed it to be rape or non-consensual.