Homosexual scandals vs heterosexual scandals

[an anarchist]

The problem is that homosexual sex is considered "locker room, comradely fun between hunks" and not something scandalous

Why the distinction between homosexual sex and heterosexual sex? No one else is making this distinction.

You are claiming that if it was a straight people in the OP incident, they would not have been criminally charged… for some reason.

if the persons in that Senate Hearing Room had been a man and a woman having sex, I am totally sure that an army of angry feminists would have beaten up that man.

what makes you so sure?

 

[Stevicus]

The way Bill Clinton was crucified shows it's not speculation.

Again...I believe homosexual sex is considered comradely fun between gentlemen...

It's different when it's a boss having sex with a subordinate.

This might also be of interest:

1983 congressional page sex scandal - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Besides, I don't think Bill Clinton was crucified. The right-wing wanted to crucify him, I suppose, but they failed.

 

[Viker]

puritans from the Democratic Party

It was just two silly guys having some fun together. Not the best place to do that sort of thing, but.


There was no crime and this was barely "scandalous".

You call us puritan? I bet it's because they were gay that you may have a problem with? Because I can't see why you'd make a big deal out of nothing. Would you be okay with it if they were a heterosexual Italian couple?

 

[Viker]

because if a senator had had sex in the Hearing Room with a woman, he would be in jail by now.

No he wouldn't. He'd likely be out of a job. He'd possibly be out of a marriage, if the woman wasn't his wife.

 

[Viker]

The way Bill Clinton was crucified shows it's not speculation

That
Was
Republicans
Who went insane
The actual "puritans".

And notice that he didn't go to jail, lose his job or wife. Lucky man.

 

[Estro Felino]

It was just two silly guys having some fun together. Not the best place to do that sort of thing, but.

If it had dealt with a senator and his mistress "having fun" in that room...an army of misandric feminists would have skinned that senator alive.
Admit that

There was no crime and this was barely "scandalous".

Double standards.
If a senator had been there, having sex with a woman...he would be in jail now.

You call us puritan? I bet it's because they were gay that you may have a problem with? Because I can't see why you'd make a big deal out of nothing. Would you be okay with it if they were a heterosexual Italian couple?

Absolutely not.
They belong in jail. That room is a sacred institutional place that cannot be profaned.

 

[Estro Felino]

That
Was
Republicans
Who went insane
The actual "puritans".

And notice that he didn't go to jail, lose his job or wife. Lucky man.

I seriously doubt his wife is heterosexual.
So why would she care?

 

[Viker]

If it had dealt with a senator and his mistress "having fun" in that room...an army of misandric feminists would have skinned that senator alive

Don't be so melodramatic. We would have publicly emasculated him, especially if he was a self-righteous Republican.

All for the fun, of course.

 

[Viker]

They belong in jail. That room is a sacred institutional place that cannot be profaned

We're not a theocracy, yet. And you're talking about an American political establishment like it's Mecca or som sort of holy site. Did I mention that sordid American politics happen there?

 

[Viker]

I seriously doubt his wife is heterosexual

What makes you doubt?

 

[Estro Felino]

Don't be so melodramatic. We would have publicly emasculated him, especially if he was a self-righteous Republican.

All for the fun, of course.

So you admit that.
Thank you for acknowledging my theory was 100% right.

Could you tell the entire assembly too?

 

[Estro Felino]

We're not a theocracy, yet. And you're talking about an American political establishment like it's Mecca or som sort of holy site. Did I mention that sordid American politics happen there?

In my country politicians don't need to hide when they have a sex life.
They have sex aboveboard.

 

[Viker]

So you admit that.
Thank you for acknowledging my theory was 100% right.

Could you tell the entire assembly too?

They fear our emasculating wrath. They already know.













We need a sarcasm emoji.

 

[HonestJoe]

It's obvious that what happened one year ago or something didn't cause any reaction in the electorate of the Democratic Party.

I mean, the Senate Hearing Room, one of the most sacred places of democracy, has been turned into a squalid porn movie set. Homosexual porn, to be precise.

I think you're projecting your own biases there. As far as I can tell, the general US response to this wasn't especially focused on the gender/sexuality either way (certainly not in the mainstream), it was more an issue of time and place. Even so, I'd expect even less of negative public reaction if it had been a straight couple (especially if the woman involved was deemed attractive).

Look at it this way. Kamala Harris has been accused (somewhat unfairly I suspect) of "sleeping her way to the top" due to her relationship with a married (if separated) man in the past. I don't think that has done any harm to her campaign though. On the other side, Donald Trump is often quite boastful about the attractive women in his life, but the only issues he's faced being based on alleged lack of consent or comments about his own daughter.

Any candidate (male, at least) revealed to have had secret homosexual relationships would likely face much more difficulty, and even open and honest gay politicians still face some level of pushback from US politics, media and public, albeit more subtle than in the past.

The problem is that homosexual sex is considered "locker room, comradely fun between hunks" and not something scandalous.

I have absolutely no idea where you're getting that impression from. I've never seen that kind of idea expressed anywhere, especially not publicly.

Every time a congressperson or a politician has a heterosexual intercourse (vaginal intercourse), the feminists have an inhumane reaction (you know similar to the reaction many had when Trump was elected).

Most politicians are married and will be presumed to have sexual intercourse with their partners. I fear you're conflating normal relationships and accusations of non-consensual sexual acts and I'd so desperately hope you'd be able to understand the different reactions to those two things.

 

[Viker]

In my country politicians don't need to hide when they have a sex life.
They have sex aboveboard.

That's okay. You Italians keep rolling with it. "When in Rome" they always say.

 

[Estro Felino]

They fear our emasculating wrath. They already know.













We need a sarcasm emoji.

I know it's a hyperbole...but you're practically admitting that the feminists didn't say a word because it dealt with two men having sex.
If it dealt with a male senator possessing his female intern in the Hearing Room... the feminists would have spat at him.

Confess.

 

[Revoltingest]

As Oriana Fallaci said, truth hurts. But it heals.

You confuse insults with truth.
Candor needn't include insults.

 

[Revoltingest]

I doubt 99.9% of Italians care

You're generous.
But my example was a hypothetical for her benefit.

 

[Viker]

I know it's a hyperbole...but you're practically admitting that the feminists didn't say a word because it dealt with two men having sex.
If it dealt with a male senator possessing his female intern in the Hearing Room... the feminists would have spat on him.

Confess.

We're not making a big deal out of them being to men together. Most think it tacky and foolish. But they don't call it fooling around for no reason.

If he compelled her do it....we would obliterate his career.

 

[Kathryn]

It was an intern. It was consensual. Nothing to see here. Move along.