[Vengeance]

Malankazooie, on 17 November 2017 - 07:21 PM, said:

Jameis Winston is the latest name. He's quarterback for the NFL's Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Been accused of groping an Uber driver. Not surprising at all. Google search the trouble he got in while he was at Florida State University.

Inbetween that and his tendency to hold on to the ball to long and force the ball into bad windows he should have been drafted in the 4th round.

[Mezla PigDog]

Andorion, on 16 November 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

Just a small comment -

I would be more comfortable with some more perspectives from women regarding this. This entire affair is centred around a biological reflex that men cannot experience. Thus I consider the discussion incomplete.

You want us to talk about out breasts on a forum populated mostly by males AND watch a 30min video of people playing poker?

The extent of that reaction is different for different women so meh. And the fetishisation of breast feeding annoys me too much to get into a discussion about it. Having not watched the video but knowing how little men tend to know about breast feeding are we sure he wasn't just mimicking a baby crying as like "Your baby is at home/backstage, you're being a negligent mother" type of distraction? That would be my first thought.

If someone did try to do that on purpose I would think it was really very very creepy and would probably feel similar to sexual harassment because you know like - boobs.

[Tsundoku]

I keep waiting for the fun police to charge me for something because there's a photo of me with Shiara's bra on my head.

[Centzon Totochtin]

Tsundoku, on 18 November 2017 - 10:04 AM, said:

I keep waiting for the fun police to charge me for something because there's a photo of me with Shiara's bra on my head.

I believe you were given permission so no issues there, and she was not in said bra at the time

[Abyss]

Briar King, on 19 November 2017 - 12:43 AM, said:

Ryan Seacrest now

This ones a little suspicious. Wardrobe stylist from a decade ago reappears, demands money to keep quiet, gets told to shove it, goes to the press.

Tho if six more accusers surface, well...

[Whisperzzzzzzz]

Abyss, on 19 November 2017 - 02:37 AM, said:

Briar King, on 19 November 2017 - 12:43 AM, said:

Ryan Seacrest now

This ones a little suspicious. Wardrobe stylist from a decade ago reappears, demands money to keep quiet, gets told to shove it, goes to the press.

Tho if six more accusers surface, well...

I've said it before, though possibly not on these forums — as person after person comes forward with career-ending accusations, it's very probable that rich and famous people across the country are getting surreptitious calls and emails, asking for money in exchange for silence — and people are likely paying (and some proportion of them are probably innocent, but are paying just to keep any whiff of scandal away).

This post has been edited by Whisperzzzzzzz: 19 November 2017 - 01:55 PM

[Abyss]

Jeffrey Tambor accused, pretty convincingly, by TRANSPARENT co-star Trace Lysette.


Wow.


Fuck.

[Malankazooie]

I'm surprised you guys didn't see the 80s police report about Sylvester Stallone that has come to light.

Also, you guys know about Brett Ratner, but none of you saw the accusation about him and Russel Simmons together?

Not sure which one is more disgusting, but they are both criminal.

[D'rek]

Oh come on people, do you think a woman poker player has never purposefully "triggered an instinctive biological reaction" to a man in order to gain an edge, before?

Sure, it's a jerk-store move, but those are commonly considered acceptable in poker... especially non-professional poker where no one's worried about losing their sponsors, and especially in televised non-competitive poker events where there's probably some producer encouraging it for more TV entertainment factor.

[Aptorian]

By now you should now it's only bad if a man does it, Drek. If a woman does it it's actually the patriarchy forcing her to do so, making her the real victim.

[King Lear]

Yeah, I'm not sure why either of you think that people are incapable of thinking that's gross too.

[worry]

Why use the most generic way to phrase it then ("triggered an instinctive biological reaction"), to make your point? Why create that distance from what he specifically did? It's true that he rattled her, threw off her calm, made her sweat, invaded her head space, which are all -- generically speaking -- "acceptable" tactics in poker. But is it honest? Does it really describe what he did? Because what he did was he forced a woman to lactate, on television, against her will, to humiliate her. You should be able to say what you're defending while you're defending it.

[D'rek]

Sure, it's gross, but the hyperbole of the offended-on-her-behalf commentary (e.g. he's "WEAPONIZING HER BODY") makes it sound like women are some sort of unviolable sacred cows, that the act itself is so uniquely inconceivable because he did it to a woman.

worry, on 20 November 2017 - 07:44 PM, said:

Why use the most generic way to phrase it then ("triggered an instinctive biological reaction"), to make your point? Why create that distance from what he specifically did? It's true that he rattled her, threw off her calm, made her sweat, invaded her head space, which are all -- generically speaking -- "acceptable" tactics in poker. But is it honest? Does it really describe what he did? Because what he did was he forced a woman to lactate, on television, against her will, to humiliate her. You should be able to say what you're defending while you're defending it.

That seems really pedantic? Sure, I can say it: he made noises that forced her breasts to lactate. Cool. Happy now?

Did you know some pro poker players deliberately refrain from cascading water over their bodies or rubbing condensed bars of animal fat on themselves in order to generate olfactory stimulus in their surrounding airspace which then forces opponents to experience physical sensations of discomfort in their lower esophagus.

[QuickTidal]

D, on 20 November 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

that the act itself is so uniquely inconceivable because he did it to a woman.

No. It's "uniquely inconceivable" (Really?) because of the insidious levels it grounds down into, like a mother's relationship with her child, her body's willingness to respond against her wishes in that moment, and the idea of a man putting a woman into a situation she cannot beat/fight against....something she can not respond in kind with. She can't "for arguments sake" give him an insta-erection unless he chooses to be turned on by whatever she does to affect that. Meanwhile it doesn't matter which little squat, ugly POS makes baby crying noises to her...her body WILL respond and lactate. That's the difference.

This does't make her some sacred cow...it makes her a human in a world with other humans who should not pull shit like this and have people DEFEND it.

D, on 20 November 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

Did you know some pro poker players deliberately refrain from cascading water over their bodies or rubbing condensed bars of animal fat on themselves in order to generate olfactory stimulus in their surrounding airspace which then forces opponents to experience physical sensations of discomfort in their lower esophagus.

If your point here is that poker players are complete and total reprehensible assholes? Point taken, and logged.

This post has been edited by QuickTidal: 20 November 2017 - 08:11 PM

[worry]

I don't think it's pedantic. In fact I think it's obfuscatory to pretend what he did is akin to more conventional tactics. Because the point I'm making is it's not just "gross", like being smelly is gross. It's abominable. Not hyperbole.

But you said it, which I wouldn't say makes me "happy" now, but it's something. It's definitely clarifying. You, at least, are not pretending to believe that forcing a woman to lactate and having B.O. around them -- by virtue of both involving instinctual responses from those people, if nothing else -- are on par.

As far as the woman as "sacred cow" thing, I do think some things are inviolable, like personal autonomy, and I don't think it requires a patronizing attitude to believe that. In fact, I'd call it a basic tenet of human decency. (I'm not saying you don't, since this event clearly doesn't even breach that tenet, for you). That this particular abuse could only happen to a woman (or trans-man) doesn't mean the tenet only applies to women -- even as I also understand that Jason Alexander's presumption of control -- however intimate -- over McCormack's body are indeed rooted in patriarchy. (P.S. "patriarchy" jokes are a lot like "snowflake" jokes -- they're all alike!)

[D'rek]

Good thing this thread is in the Inn because now I have to ask about penises. I thought dudes could easily have inadvertent erections and even accidental ejaculations quite readily??? (albeit less so but not non-zero with age) Has mass media lied to me and men can always choose to be turned on or not? (For that matter, as far as I'm concerned not all/most women can choose when to be turned or not, either...?)

Doesn't really matter though. Taking the breasts and genitals out of poker, it's still well known for all sorts of scummy behaviour like talking about family issues that were traumatizing for an opponent, or all sorts of ultra-annoying behaviours designed to provoke a physical reaction. At least the celebrity poker players seem to be more self-aware of it, even self-deprecating about it, and seem to mostly be doing it to be entertaining, not to actually be malicious. Pretty sure McCormack knew what she was getting into, and from my perspective watching the video she's not nearly as bothered by it as this thread is.

No, that doesn't make Alexander's actions good in any which way, but put this outside the context of a Harvey Weinstein thread and I think it'd be a lot more "Wow, has-been celebrity tries to be funny but just looks creepy and embarassing", rather than "Famous pervert uses nefarious psychology to take control of a woman's body"

[Malankazooie]

D, on 20 November 2017 - 02:48 PM, said:

Oh come on people, do you think a woman poker player has never purposefully "triggered an instinctive biological reaction" to a man in order to gain an edge, before?

Sure, it's a jerk-store move, but those are commonly considered acceptable in poker... especially non-professional poker where no one's worried about losing their sponsors, and especially in televised non-competitive poker events where there's probably some producer encouraging it for more TV entertainment factor.

Well, it's true (though extremely rare) that men can lactate. But instead of mimicking a fussy, hungry baby crying, you have to mimic one of the following to get the man to lactate:

- The sound of a bored out 5.7L hemi engine.
- The sound of the cork being pulled out of an unopened bottle of 20 year old Pappy Van Winkle bourbon whiskey.
- The sound of a circular saw ripping through a 2 by 4 oak wood board.

[Silencer]

I'm not seeing any new angles to this poker debate.


Move. On.

[worry]

For the record, I originally brought it up as a reply to Abyss worrying about Seinfeld cast members, and because I had just seen the twitter thread the day before. I wasn't equating it with Weinstein's deeds, and I didn't expect it to blow up in thread focus, it was more like (alongside Jerry's teen bride and Michael Richards' n-word meltdown) a "don't trust any of them!" half-joking response (though I'm 100% earnest about my feelings on what he did).

Regarding penises, I think the accidental boner thing is kind of cartoony, and dudes try to get away with the perception that it's an automatic, unstoppable response to stimuli and they just can't help it.
It's mostly not true!
Typically the scenario would be a dude is reminded of sex by some stimulus OR his mind wanders towards sex "before he knows it" -- speaking generously -- and thus he'd get a boner in inappropriate times that he might want to claim is accidental or unintended. But that whole process isn't an automatic response, like sweating or whatever...it's closer to normal letting yourself get distracted and being careless (again, speaking generously -- it can also be just plain creepy in certain contexts).
There are contexts where it's closer to reflex, but I am saying if a dude gets a boner at a weird time it's because of what he's thinking, not because of something that has happened to him. And any dude who's like "oops, how did that get there?" is trying to pull a fast one.

[worry]

Also, on another note, two bigwigs of American journalism have claims against them: Charlie Rose (eight accusers) and Glenn Thrush of the NYT (multiple incidents, and the Vox story has 40 sources including corroborators). Both involve incidents of groping, with coworkers and others.

This post has been edited by worry: 20 November 2017 - 11:01 PM