dianaiad
Well-Known Member
That's fine. He IS a sleazy scumbag. And he was absolutely and completely responsible for everything that happened at the time. Monica Lewinsky was not responsible for anything HE did. She was only responsible for herself and her own actions. To talk about how she was responsible for her own actions is to take responsibility away from what he did.
Monica has to deal with her own issues, and she's had to take the blame for his for a long time. Nothing she did, or thought, takes a thing away from HIS sleazebaggery. The two things are entirely different issues.
And that is what I was referring to. In terms of his cheating, his lies and his actions, nothing SHE did or thought matters. Had he behaved himself, she would either not have had the occasion to need to be 'responsible' for her own actions with him. She might have gone off and been irresponsible with someone ELSE, but not with him. She is not in any way responsible for his choices or actions, and mentioning that she 'is responsible for her own actions" is making her responsible for, and thus excusing, his.
NOTHING Monica did excuses what Clinton did. Her 'responsibility' is utterly beside the point and completely irrelevant.
Yes. She did, perhaps. That doesn't mean anything at all as to what CLINTON did. columbus, in general terms, when a situation like that arises, where the balance of power is that off; when the one with the power can fire, abuse, order, whatever, the one without the power, and the powerful one has sex with the one without, it is considered to be 'rape' as thoroughly as when a legal adult has sex with a minor. It's called 'statuary rape' in that instance, and is punished as strictly. This is based upon the idea that if the one without power doesn't have a whole lot of choice in the matter because of age OR because of that power imbalance, it is as if physical force is being used. It's rape. If the one without the power can't say 'no,' or perceives that s/he could have negative consequences if s/he did say no, it's rape. By definition.
In the case of statuary rape, it doesn't matter whether the fifteen or sixteen year old SAYS the sex was consensual...it wasn't. Even if the younger one was eager for the encounter, or even sought it out, the responsibility is ALL on the part of the adult.
The recent 'ME TOO" thing, where all the women were going after the 'casting couch'...talking about sexual pressure or expected 'favors' in order to get or keep jobs, should tell you; the responsibility belongs entirely to the one with the power (and no, it isn't always a man with that power; mostly, but women will pull this stuff if they have power, too).
With Clinton and Monica, we aren't talking about whether Monica was an adult....a whoppin' 21 years old...or not. We are talking about the power imbalance. She was an INTERN, and he was POTUS. A greater power imbalance would be difficult to find, frankly.
It is my opinion...and from what I've been reading and dealing with over the last few years, I think it's a well founded one...that Democrats think that in the case of sexual misconduct, that conservatives are responsible for any incident in which they are involved, perpetrator or victim, and liberals never are, perpetrator or victim.
What YOU did, in talking about how Monica was responsible for her own actions, is the equivalent of saying that if the rape victim hadn't worn quite so short a skirt.......
The thing is, what makes it 'rape' is what CLINTON could have done in terms of threat or pressure or power, not what Monica did or thought.
