Posted on 05/14/2018 5:18:55 PM PDT by grundle
Disclaimer: I am a person who believes that women have free will. Some of the following statements by me may seem controversial, but I am operating under the assumption that women have free will.
The recent New Yorker article on Eric Schneiderman’s alleged abuse of four women states:
“They allege that he repeatedly hit them, often after drinking, frequently in bed and never with their consent.”
If these intelligent, strong willed, college educated women with high paying jobs and expensive apartments in Manhattan continued to go to bed with Schneiderman “repeatedly,” “often,” and “frequently,” after the first time that he allegedly hit them, I’m having trouble understanding how any of this was “never with their consent.”
None of these women have accused Schneiderman of kidnapping them.
I think each of these woman did the following cost-benefit analysis in her head:
“On the one hand, this guy is a physically abusive scumbag, and I should probably stop going to bed with him.”
“On the other hand, he is famous and wealthy, and he has a lot of influence and social status. So I should continue going to bed with him.”
So it seems to me that these women looked at their options, and they apparently decided that continuing to go to bed with him was a good idea.
It seems to me that if we are to view these women as victims, then we are essentially saying that they do not have free will. And that is not something that I am willing to accept.
You can get mad at me if you want. You can hate me if you want. But I still maintain my belief that women have free will.
If anyone disagrees with me on this, please explain why in the comment section.
“Good question.”
Amazing that here where we know what evils powerful people in government can inflict to ruin ones life, we are puzzled by this!
Now put your thinking cap back on.
This isn’t about the women. It’s about the man being such a hypocrite.
“Well, I’m not mad, because I wondered the same thing. No man would ever get a second chance to do that crap to me. Geez, I’ve left men for not helping me with the dishes. God help anyone who hit me. I have a dark side.”
You have a dark side! Nothing compared what this sick AG could inflict on you.
oh, no kidding! He better hit me hard enough to get a head start out of the country, cause I am going to get up sometime.
If it was NOT part of S&M, not consensual, then those ladies were nuts. He’s a putz!!!
Masochistic women plus a big **** ?
I am going to give it to you people very simply.
How does understanding or explaining or excusing women who let themselves become repeated victims in any way change the sadistic perversions of this man?
Is he less of a sadistic pervert because of their psychological weaknesses? Is he somehow still qualified to be a state DA and potential candidate for governor because he targeted and attached women with weaknesses?
That’s like saying a robber is no longer a robber because he robs people who ought to have better judgement in their time and location choices of ATMs. Absolutely not. Their vulnerabilities do not make pervs and criminals into normal, non criminal people people.
Victims often can and should be cognizant of avoiding these predators. But that doesn’t absolve the predators. Ever.
It seems to me that if we are to view these women as victims, then we are essentially saying that they do not have free will. And that is not something that I am willing to accept.
Free Will comes in various models: "weak", "strong", and in between. Somebody might like to quit smoking for example, and yet not quit smoking. This does not show that free will does not exist, it shows they have not willed to quit strongly enough to overcome the addiction.
My understanding of the cycle of violence (as a non-expert but with a little experience and training as a volunteer on a domestic abuse hotline) includes times where the abusive tendencies are under control...and that those who are abused keep hoping/wishing/fooling themselves into thinking that the abuse was a one-time, or two-time,...or three time, ...etc thing. Eventually it may get worse and worse and they finally overcome their fantasy narrative that it will be ok. The abuser will typically get very insecure about losing the abused and may try to threaten them.
Like men, women are often foolish, but not always in the same ways. Women--although they are loathe to admit it--are often attracted to confidence to the point of near cockiness in men. Just like men are attracted to certain physical features of women. Its stupid animal nature at work. And yes women are attracted to success and money with that cockiness as well. So sure there were some aspects of abusive relationships some women fall for...and to keep those aspects they will like to themselves for a time. That does not mean that the abuse wasn't real. It only means that for a time the women didn't want to see it.
Forget it, Jake - it’s FR. Women are always to blame.
“Good question.”
No, it’s a very lousy question because it shifts the focus away from Cuomo, Schumer et al. This helps the dems.
The focus should be on what Cuomo, Schumers et al knew and when they knew it. This hurts the dems.
Intellectual exercise => Should we do things that a) help the dems; or b) hurt the dems?
Yep.
Anyone wonder why so many victims of the misogynistic Kennedy males kept silent?
So just HOW GOOD was this ‘man’? Being New York City, even some PHYSICAL TORTURE is better than the ‘Metrosexuals’ trying to expel their inferiority complex.
“This isn’t about the women.”
Exactly! It’s about exposing dem corruption, hypocrisy and possible criminality.
Making it about the women harms that effort.
“oh, no kidding! He better hit me hard enough to get a head start out of the country, cause I am going to get up sometime.”
He wouldn’t hit you. You would get pulled over for failing to signal a turn, the smell of marijuana would prompt a search where the would find the heroin and unregistered gun.
“He better hit me hard enough to get a head start out of the country, cause I am going to get up sometime.”
So you would go after the top law enforcement officer in your state after he threatened to have you followed and your phone tapped?
Maybe not always. But your point is well taken. Sadly.
But I will never back down on the points I made. Leaving your keys in the car is STUPID. But does that make the thief less of a thief? Absolutely not.
Do we say because a woman does not leave a man who beats her, that he is not really beating her?
My problem here is not so much the criticism of the women, which is somewhat one dimensional, as it is the convoluted logic of claiming that this dick isn't guilty. He is still a sick F**k.
Agree. The level of idiocy on this thread is sad.
They be ‘Hos.’
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.