Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      


Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 7
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5523
Reputation: 277.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:48 am    Post subject: It's just the start: more tales of the sexual pogrom Reply with quote

Quote:
‘Just the start’: more stories of sexual harassment expected to rock political Ottawa, say observers
By JOLSON LIM, MARCO VIGLIOTTI JAN. 29, 2018
This is probably going to get worse before it eventually gets better,' said former Liberal Hill staffer Greg MacEachern.

Ontario PC Party leader and former Conservative MP Patrick Brown, left, abruptly resigned from his post at the top of the provincial party last week over allegations of sexual misconduct. Liberal MP Kent Hehr resigned from cabinet last week after being accused of sexual harassment.

More stories of sexual misconduct and harassment are bound to surface on Parliament Hill in the coming weeks and months, with highly-publicized allegations levelled against Patrick Brown and Kent Hehr giving renewed urgency to the #MeToo and Time’s Up movements, according to former Hill staffers and political observers.

“I certainly think it’s the beginning, not the end,” said Nancy Peckford, founder of Equal Voice, which advocates for women to participate in politics. For now, she applauded the “significant interest in long overdue reflection” about what needs to be done in order to eliminate bad behaviour by powerful men and the culture in political circles that enables these actions.

In a dramatic turn of events, Mr. Brown was forced to resign as Ontario Progressive Conservative leader in the early hours of Jan. 25 after CTV News reported that two young women had accused him of sexual misconduct, allegedly while he was a federal politician. Two more Barrie-area women have since come forward with stories of Mr. Brown behaving badly.

On the same day, Liberal MP Kent Hehr (Calgary Centre, Alta.) stepped down as sports and disabilities minister “pending the outcome an investigation” into allegations of sexual misconduct after a woman who worked as an Alberta legislative staffer alleged on Twitter that Mr. Hehr, while still a provincial MLA, had made women feel “unsafe,” and made sexually suggestive comments.

The day before, Nova Scotia Scotia Progressive Conservative leader Jamie Baillie was forced to resign after his party launched a third-party investigation following an investigator’s report into a sexual harassment claim against him.

The stunning series of resignations have led to a renewed calls for action against sexual harassment in the workplace, particularly in Canadian politics, where men still make up a disproportionate number of people elected and in high-ranking positions.

Greg MacEachern, a former Liberal staffer, said the series of men being outed for alleged bad behaviour in Canadian politics may “just be the start.” Mr. MacEachern, senior vice-president of Environics, told The Hill Times that there’s a “reckoning coming for the way staff have been treated in Canadian politics.”

“I don’t think this is over. I expect there’s going to be other stories that come forward and this is probably going to get worse before it eventually gets better. But it is going to get better,” he said.

Lisa Kinsella, managing partner at Daisy Group and spend more than a decade working for government, said “things will get better, but first women have more stories to tell, and those who come forward are brave.“

Their bravery will inspire others. When women come together, we can create powerful change,” she told The Hill Times.

Michele Austin, senior adviser with Summa Strategies and a former Conservative staffer, said that given last week’s events, it’s “important for everyone to take stock in political offices, about their workplaces, and [understand] the tools available and the people available.” “I also think that this a blessing in disguise, despite the horrible things that happened to those two young women, it’s taken this issue into the public, and [made] people realize how important [it is] to treat people with respect,” she said.

“It’s very important for everyone to do their part.”

In light of Mr. Brown’s resignation, people working in federal and Ontario politics and the media have said his alleged behaviour was the subject of rumour in political circles. Mr. MacEachern said he’d heard “opaque rumours” of Mr. Brown’s alleged sexual misconduct, but “figured at this stage of his leadership, if there was something that had happened, his team had known about it.

”Ontario PC MPP Lisa MacLeod told reporters on her way into her party’s emergency caucus meeting on Jan. 26 that she had warned party officials at least twice before the end of 2017 about similar accounts from women about Mr. Brown’s alleged behaviour, but senior officials in her party had dismissed it as unfounded. “There were lots of things that were percolating that a lot of people heard.”

Ms. MacLeod later said she had only told Tory insider Dimitri Soudas, a volunteer on Mr. Brown’s campaign.

Policies and protocol a way to keep ‘entrench’ anti-harassment culture

Ms. Peckford told The Hill Times she believed that the resignations represent an “opening for the entrenchment of better policies, new protocols and high standards,” which have been sorely lacking in legislatures across Canada. However, she cautioned that last week’s events only provide an “opportunity for change” and how well that change will entrench itself is unknown. She said better workplace guidance and policies are needed in order to ensure those sexually harassed have a consistent, reliable, and clear mechanism to address the matter, which can be less stressful than approaching the media.

Currently, the House of Commons has a policy outlining explicit recourse for elected officials who may have been sexually harassed by their elected peers, although it does not apply to staffers or public servants. This week, the Liberal government’s anti-workplace harassment legislation, Bill C-65, is being debated in the House of Commons.(Emphasis added)

Introduced in November, the bill aims at providing workers a clearer process to deal with allegations of harassment and bullying in federal workplaces and enforce strict privacy rules to protect people who come forward.One of the women who spoke to CTV News said she did not report Mr. Brown’s alleged behaviour to authorities because she didn’t know what options she had.“I didn’t even know who HR was in this context. Particularly being in a constituency office. I mean, I just didn’t know what to do,” she said.

Mr. MacEachern said for staff, “it gets much more worse because we’re talking about a power dynamic.”

“One has economic power, they have power of holding their career, not just the career they have now but the career they have down the road in terms of references,” he said.

Ms. Kinsella said when she started on the Hill as a 32-year-old woman, she and her female colleagues “knew who to stay away from and who you shouldn’t get into an elevator alone with.”

“There was a small group of us who would get together informally and discuss salaries and working conditions, because of the lack of labour protections,” she said, adding that her older age “spared me a lot of negative experiences that younger female staffers face.

”Ms. Kinsella said she has a “long list” of stories: one example is when an older senator made an inappropriate comment about her appearance in front of other. She was also on the receiving end of lewd comments from a male journalist.

Alise Mills, a Conservative pundit and conservative strategist who has worked on campaigns for a variety of different parties, told The Hill Times, “Anyone who’s worked on the Hill knows a couple of things: the campaigns don’t have an HR process, which causes a lot of these problems.”

“[It] also leads us to anonymous accusers coming out and basically [annihilating] somebody, because there is no formal process. So the people that are complaining that an anonymous person shouldn’t be able to do that, should also be looking at why it happened.”

Ms. Mills, who has worked for multiple parties in different provinces, and faced harassment while working as a staffer in Ottawa in her 20s, said the issue transcends political parties. She said she’s seen progress with how women are treated since that time.

“The real feeling, at least up until 10 years ago, that you weren’t onside, you weren’t a team player if you were going to complain about anything…They made sure to tell me that, ‘Alise, you are one of the guys,'” she said.

“Now, would they have said that to me today? Absolutely not.”Ms. Peckford said men on the Hill also have an onus to call out bad behaviour and promote an expectation of respectful treatment of their female colleagues.

“That’s the kind of conversation that more Parliamentarians, [particularly] men, need to have with each other. Part of shifting and transforming culture is that people hold each other to account and equality and respect are fully entrenched.”

Ms. Austin said it’s also up to the older generation of female staffers, “if there are any left, to reach a hand down to the younger generation and say, ‘Hey, if you need anything, we’re here.’”

She said there’s still “100 per cent a stigma” for women staffers who have faced sexual harassment and that changes won’t happen overnight.

“It’s very difficult for people to come to terms with what happened to them, let alone to speak out about it, especially when you’re in a relationship centred around power, which is what politics is all about. It’s not going to be easy for any side, but it’s important,” she said.

Mr. MacEachern also said sexual misconduct allegations may surface “not just in politics but in media as well.”“Remember, there are a lot of reporters who hold power over junior staffers,” he said.
http://www.hilltimes.com/2018/.....ers/132461


What this makes me suspect is that we are in the midst of a Gloria Alred type sexual persecution -- and this may not even be mid-way. Journalists know when a story is 'developing' and not yet ready for publication. They know what 's in the pipeline. The quoted people are NOT just 'observers'. Kinsella is the wife of Warren Kinsella, Liberal strategist! It quotes other 'former' Liberal insiders. We have a production underway, and Liberal Party operatives as well as media people are involved. They aren't disinterested spectators.

The women have to be 'persuaded' and -- perhaps -- incentivized. We know nothing about how these things are organized -- and organized they are! But you don't have to be brave to make an anonymous allegation against a successful man. You have to be a rat. These women have to encouraged and supported mostly because their allegations are so trivial, amounting to unwanted sexual attention in a lot of cases, or at least particpation in the dance of gestures that are involved in 'seductions'. We are just being naive if we go along with this idea that at least brave women are throwing off the yoke of living in a world with men in it.

But we get to witness the sad spectacle of the male bureaucrats in government, as they file by, pull their forelock and depositing their testicles with HR as a security deposit. These dim bulbs think they will be safe! What they need is protection from random allegations.

{For anyone who ever marvelled about why the Jews never got out of Germany before the Gestapo knocked at their door -- this is an excellent illustration of how people fool themselves.)

This won't stop, it will only consolidate and find a new set of targets. The rewards are to rich.

It will have to be stopped.

What no one thinks of is that a younger generation of men are watching. At first, only a few resisted, and they were older. But that few grew as men begin to realize that, if you're guilty anyway, why play the game? This isn't abstract notion -- this voiceless resistance is already a rational choice for young white Canadian men. That's why there is so much intimidation on campuses -- there is pushback, and it's responded to the way the faculty responded to Leslie Shepherd's use of teaching materials. That is, with Orwellian means.

You can resist now, or you can resist later. Or maybe your son will resist, or your grandson, as they curse the messed up social world you have left for them.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( I'm sure its not the end of the accusations , the liberal minister is saying today that harassment will be defined by regulations as that would be easier to change than the current laws . so clearly there going to make it easier for someone to claim and report harassment and make its definition more vague )



David Akin 🇨🇦‏Verified account @davidakin · 8m8 minutes ago

.@PattyHajdu says harassment will be defined by regulation because it is easier and quicker to change than if it was defined by law.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1034
Reputation: 113.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 1:21 pm    Post subject: Re: It's just the start: more tales of the sexual pogrom Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:


The women have to be 'persuaded' and -- perhaps -- incentivized. We know nothing about how these things are organized -- and organized they are!

You know nothing but you know these are organized.

Hmm...of course that makes no sense .
Quote:
But you don't have to be brave to make an anonymous allegation against a successful man. You have to be a rat. These women have to encouraged and supported mostly because their allegations are so trivial, amounting to unwanted sexual attention in a lot of cases, or at least particpation in the dance of gestures that are involved in 'seductions'. We are just being naive if we go along with this idea that at least brave women are throwing off the yoke of living in a world with men in it.

You should talk with more women and find out just how hard it is to come forward with a sexual assault charge.
And of course with this prevalent thinking of yours it only makes it harder. You have a serious issue with women. A serious issue.
Quote:

But we get to witness the sad spectacle of the male bureaucrats in government, as they file by, pull their forelock and depositing their testicles with HR as a security deposit. These dim bulbs think they will be safe! What they need is protection from random allegations.

They have it. The Courts.

Funny how most of them never bother, ever wonder why ?

I don't.
Quote:
{For anyone who ever marvelled about why the Jews never got out of Germany before the Gestapo knocked at their door -- this is an excellent illustration of how people fool themselves.)

The only fool is you.

Not only is that a disgusting generalization but it is absolutely incoorect . But thank you for this crass moment . It explains a lot.

The Jews never left because a large portion of them thought things would settle down soon enough , they had seen the rise and fall of anti-Jewish actions before.
More than half of them were owner or operators of business's.

They considered themselves German with Jewish heritage. They assimilated in large part.
And where to go? After the artist/writers/painters/scientists left they stayed in mostly Europe and they too were caught up later.

And where else could they go? They had to have a connections, sponsor and so on and only a few were able.
To get into N Am was almost impossible so count that out.

Anyhow, go educte yourself before pulling a brain fart like this again.

Quote:


It will have to be stopped.

Thats the plan, to get men to stop being so effing boorish .

Quote:


You can resist now, or you can resist later. Or maybe your son will resist, or your grandson, as they curse the messed up social world you have left for them.


Yes...perhaps they will question what their ancestors were doing at work to the women.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5523
Reputation: 277.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 2:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Quote:

But you don't have to be brave to make an anonymous allegation against a successful man. You have to be a rat. These women have to encouraged and supported mostly because their allegations are so trivial, amounting to unwanted sexual attention in a lot of cases, or at least particpation in the dance of gestures that are involved in 'seductions'. We are just being naive if we go along with this idea that at least brave women are throwing off the yoke of living in a world with men in it.


You should talk with more women and find out just how hard it is to come forward with a sexual assault charge.
And of course with this prevalent thinking of yours it only makes it harder. You have a serious issue with women. A serious issue.


How hard is it? I wish you'd share with us what all those less brave women who haven't gotten up the nerve to start a media trial over their bit of sexual small potatoes.

I am imagining a situation where people went looking for sexual sins of their particular rival or enemy -- particularly if they have any standing in the community -- in order to "end the oppression". I don't think this is the way that women, in general, are living their lives.

I don't mean they don't have problems.

I imagine a group of female friends talked about all these sex scandals ... (do you notice how women have a network that warns them of the danger zones? So women have the knowledge) ... and the women are telling stories, and one tells her story.

It started out back when she was 15 and -- let's say -- Ralph Goodale now that he's a cabinet minister -- let his spaniel hump her leg back when they called him "Pizza-face". But it quickly became embellished for effect, and then some parts were added to add to the drama ... and first thing you know, we have a whole new mythology.

When a reporter manages to tap into some of these female networks and find out about the woman with the Ralph Goodale story. And the first thing you know, she's being coaxed by a reporter to "come forward" ... and by this time, she's embellished the real event, and made up some things to make it a better story, and now it's getting out of control ... and she wants out.

So they try to 'empower' her. They tell her she's brave. If she's worried about publicity, they can fix that. She can be anonymous. And her other worries are overcome. There is an offer about expenses. She realizes that half her story is bullshit and the other half exaggeration ... they say it's 11 years old, no one will remember.

That's the kind of scenario I imagine. Yes, organized. And scheduled. It's just too close to the election not to serve powerful interests. In a real party, supporters would come together for the purpose of gaining power as the election approaches. The attack on Brown is more like a palace coup.

I am not characterizing this as anything more than my speculation. But how else could this shower of allegations against these political targets come about at this time?

I should add that it isn't about sex and young girls either. When Jagmeet Singh announced his engagement, there were no gasps about "inappropriateness". They don't have any trouble with a 40-something trying to get into 20-something small. Not if their politics are on the left.

I don't say who organized it and incentivized it, and I don't say whose interests it chiefly serves. But that's how I see it. You have to give me evidence, however of the moment, that this is wrong. Not just snorts of derision.

But I am willing to be shown my errors. You know of the great difficulty women have with this, so tell us.
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1034
Reputation: 113.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 3:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:


How hard is it? I wish you'd share with us what all those less brave women who haven't gotten up the nerve to start a media trial over their bit of sexual small potatoes.

Hard, very very hard.
1) Social stigma
2) Believability
3) Ostracization
4) Family issues

....all of those are just a start.

I am privy to too numerous actions by men against women. It sickens me when they do not stand up yet I am sickened by the response from the Cops but at the same time I understand some of the Cops position in this.

A women I worked with was date raped by her neighbour in a bar in Keswick. The problem with her case is she could not recall what happened other than she went from having a good time (virtual non-drinker) at the bar to waking up on the couch at home with her jeans on but no underpants. Her door was locked from the inside.
Her frined said she got a bit spaced out and So and So took you home.

My friends daughter was raped in a pick up truck at a farm party. She knew who it was, her parents and his parents knew eacj other.
Surprisingly her Mom didnt want to pursue anything but her dad did . He took her to the police but because there was alcohol involved the Cops (Infuriatingly so) said there wasnt much they could do.
Throw in my sister being groped too many times to count , throw in actions by a cousin of my girlfriend of the time .... he is lucky he is still alive . I certainly had designs on the prick but was ordered not to do anything. ( I didnt listen) He never did show up at functions that I attended ever again.
There is no lack of info for anyone who truly wants to look into this. Ask around, ask any women and ge them to be honest and you will shake your head.

Now, there will always be outliers and those who conflate and lie , no matter the issue. We are not talking about them.
Quote:



I imagine a group of female friends talked about all these sex scandals ... (do you notice how women have a network that warns them of the danger zones? So women have the knowledge) ... and the women are telling stories, and one tells her story.

Meaning what exactly?
Of course they talk.

So do men. And?
Quote:

It started out back when she was 15 and -- let's say -- Ralph Goodale now that he's a cabinet minister -- let his spaniel hump her leg back when they called him "Pizza-face". But it quickly became embellished for effect, and then some parts were added to add to the drama ... and first thing you know, we have a whole new mythology.

When a reporter manages to tap into some of these female networks and find out about the woman with the Ralph Goodale story. And the first thing you know, she's being coaxed by a reporter to "come forward" ... and by this time, she's embellished the real event, and made up some things to make it a better story, and now it's getting out of control ... and she wants out.

So they try to 'empower' her. They tell her she's brave. If she's worried about publicity, they can fix that. She can be anonymous. And her other worries are overcome. There is an offer about expenses. She realizes that half her story is bullshit and the other half exaggeration ... they say it's 11 years old, no one will remember.

As you have plainly seen over the last decade, reporters are not out on the hunt for made up stories. No editor will allow this to come to print.

The Star, the vilified Star ( as do most 1st class media), sits on plenty of stories until and unless they can have it scrutinized many ways around.

They did for the Ford brothers, in fact they were pretty much 100% bang on with all of it.

So no, I do not think there are reputable reporters , leaving aside anyone connected with Rebel (as has been shown) who are beating the bushes to find the latest Spaniel humping some womens leg.
They hear things, follow up in and investigate what they can. If the facts bear out then it gets published, but not without facts verification .
The story on PB had to be verified by three other sources before it was committed to print/tv.
Quote:

That's the kind of scenario I imagine. Yes, organized. And scheduled. It's just too close to the election not to serve powerful interests. In a real party, supporters would come together for the purpose of gaining power as the election approaches. The attack on Brown is more like a palace coup.

We shall never know if this was scheduled or not. The timing can suggest that, but then now we have another two women coming forward on PB , making it now 4. What 'organization' would be necessary in order for this to be true? The damage is done, the next two are the ho hum brigade if what you think is true.
Quote:

I am not characterizing this as anything more than my speculation. But how else could this shower of allegations against these political targets come about at this time?

Easy.

The climate has changed. Greatly changed.

Perhaps these women saw his mug in increasingly more and more TV /print/media commercials/articles and there is a bitter taste they have about him . That may be the push and the take down is schadenfreude for them. And thats ok too !

If I were wronged and the retribution came at an opportune time, then why not enjoy it?

Now, I will grant you the timing and all is curious. But thats all it is. We will likely never know.
Quote:

I should add that it isn't about sex and young girls either. When Jagmeet Singh announced his engagement, there were no gasps about "inappropriateness". They don't have any trouble with a 40-something trying to get into 20-something small. Not if their politics are on the left.

Sigh....Whay do you do this ?

Its not a left right thing w Jagmeet.

He brought her out and announced his intentions and she confirmed it. Its called love and they are both in it for that reason. It doesnt matter that he is 40 and she being 20 something.
I just got of a 9+ year relationship. She was 23 years my junior. I knew there were whispers. I knew some may not approve. And I didnt give a F then and I dont now.

What I did know is that if I treated her like I treat all women I have dated then the haters would have no ammo and no issue. When I had been with her for 4+ years nothing ever was said. She was happy and so was I .

Thats all that matters.
Quote:

I don't say who organized it and incentivized it, and I don't say whose interests it chiefly serves. But that's how I see it. You have to give me evidence, however of the moment, that this is wrong. Not just snorts of derision.


You have your way of seeing it. And I wont sneer at you thinking the thought of wanting more evidence (although PB running off is a large red flag) but at the same time you can take it for the truth until it is deemed not truthful.
Quote:

But I am willing to be shown my errors. You know of the great difficulty women have with this, so tell us.

Are you ?

Known any women? Then ask them. They will set you straight.
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5523
Reputation: 277.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 4:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:

Quote:
Bugs wrote:

How hard is it? I wish you'd share with us what all those less brave women who haven't gotten up the nerve to start a media trial over their bit of sexual small potatoes.



Hard, very very hard.
1) Social stigma
2) Believability
3) Ostracization
4) Family issues

....all of those are just a start.


All of those aren't even a start! It's empty bullshit. What stigma is there is making anonymous allegations to a news person who is assigned to collect such stories?

And why is believability a problem? Is it that the odd person that's going to ask for evidence? Almost nobody in face-to-face social encounters is going to challenge even the most bogus of victims on their credibility.

Ostracization? Do you mean a woman who repeatedly accuses her dates with rape has trouble getting dates? Ah, I know it's not nice to make fun of the weak-minded, but surely even you can excuse me for laughing at this bit of dumb-fuckery.

Family issues? I can't imagine why there'd be "family issues" if there was a genuine sexual assault. Rapists and child molesters are held in such contempt by normal criminals, like murders and thieves, that jail can't guarantee the safety of people accused of those crimes. Men don't like real rapists. Some of them will kill such people, and the others will smile when it happens.

But you subscribe to this old discredited bit of nonsense called the "patriarchy'. You tell stories. One was a date-rape. Date-rape? Really? Or something she wished she hadn't done the next day. Did she tell a cop? Did she tell her parents? A lot of time, date rape is another word for sexual buyer's remorse.

Your sister got groped? I'm sorry, I am sure it happens, but to be frank, what has that got to do with the Brown case and cases like that one? Do you want to examine your sisters' sexual behaviour on other occasions when she prayed that (sigh) Brad would only notice her, but if he groped her ... what perfect heaven that would be! Eat your heart out Angelina.

These are anecdotes. If you want to make sexual groping a crime, do so. But what is happening is a bunch of men your sister doesn't even know are being destroyed in the media for behaviour that wasn't criminal at the time, and on the scantest of evidence. You seem to be saying that it's OK because your sister got groped by some other guy back when she was attractive.

I think, other organizations are using the hysteria. Jagmeet Singh -- a 40-year-old who just recently got engaged to a 20-year-old -- is now speculating that "the presumption of innocence is just a courtroom fetish, and there's no reason that people shouldn't cast the first stone. Yeah, this has a political animus.

Do you ever wonder if there was a Patrick Brown moment in their relationship? I sort of see her telling him Jagmeet, there's no way that 40 can go into 20 and stay whole. He responds {i] No, no, you're math is wrong, 40 goes into 20 twice.[/i] And she gets confused and says, OK, then ...

And if that isn't an example of an older man using his power to exploit attractive young women, what is?

All kidding aside... how is it a solution to destroy a bunch of unrelated men for more-or-less symbolic reasons -- even if your sister did get groped when she didn't want to be groped. Does it work like sacrificing a bull for your sins?

You haven't addressed where these stories have come from, and why they are being channelled and scheduled for precisely now.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 4:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
Quote:
Quote:

But you don't have to be brave to make an anonymous allegation against a successful man. You have to be a rat. These women have to encouraged and supported mostly because their allegations are so trivial, amounting to unwanted sexual attention in a lot of cases, or at least particpation in the dance of gestures that are involved in 'seductions'. We are just being naive if we go along with this idea that at least brave women are throwing off the yoke of living in a world with men in it.


You should talk with more women and find out just how hard it is to come forward with a sexual assault charge.
And of course with this prevalent thinking of yours it only makes it harder. You have a serious issue with women. A serious issue.


How hard is it? I wish you'd share with us what all those less brave women who haven't gotten up the nerve to start a media trial over their bit of sexual small potatoes.

I am imagining a situation where people went looking for sexual sins of their particular rival or enemy -- particularly if they have any standing in the community -- in order to "end the oppression". I don't think this is the way that women, in general, are living their lives.

I don't mean they don't have problems.

I imagine a group of female friends talked about all these sex scandals ... (do you notice how women have a network that warns them of the danger zones? So women have the knowledge) ... and the women are telling stories, and one tells her story.

It started out back when she was 15 and -- let's say -- Ralph Goodale now that he's a cabinet minister -- let his spaniel hump her leg back when they called him "Pizza-face". But it quickly became embellished for effect, and then some parts were added to add to the drama ... and first thing you know, we have a whole new mythology.

When a reporter manages to tap into some of these female networks and find out about the woman with the Ralph Goodale story. And the first thing you know, she's being coaxed by a reporter to "come forward" ... and by this time, she's embellished the real event, and made up some things to make it a better story, and now it's getting out of control ... and she wants out.

So they try to 'empower' her. They tell her she's brave. If she's worried about publicity, they can fix that. She can be anonymous. And her other worries are overcome. There is an offer about expenses. She realizes that half her story is bullshit and the other half exaggeration ... they say it's 11 years old, no one will remember.

That's the kind of scenario I imagine. Yes, organized. And scheduled. It's just too close to the election not to serve powerful interests. In a real party, supporters would come together for the purpose of gaining power as the election approaches. The attack on Brown is more like a palace coup.

I am not characterizing this as anything more than my speculation. But how else could this shower of allegations against these political targets come about at this time?

I should add that it isn't about sex and young girls either. When Jagmeet Singh announced his engagement, there were no gasps about "inappropriateness". They don't have any trouble with a 40-something trying to get into 20-something small. Not if their politics are on the left.

I don't say who organized it and incentivized it, and I don't say whose interests it chiefly serves. But that's how I see it. You have to give me evidence, however of the moment, that this is wrong. Not just snorts of derision.

But I am willing to be shown my errors. You know of the great difficulty women have with this, so tell us.



the situation Brown had to deal with should never of been dealt with publicly , why would I even care who a politician had tried to date or even hook up with 5 or 10 years ago ?

this should of been dealt with privately 5 years ago , the girl involved should of talked to brown in private and told him she already had a bf and he came on too strong and that she didn't feel it be approiate for them to ever date

and that conversation would of pretty much been the end of it , no need to go to the media or police and ruin his career and life , its something they could of dealt with themselves , it wasn't a big deal

we didn't need to know about and it should never of been Ontario's number 1 issue with an election months away
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 6:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( now the pc's are making claims against themselves ? Goldie Ghamari one of brown's hand picked candidates and who many said wasn't even really a conservative is now making an allegation against an actual pc mpp )


Reevely: Ontario's PCs investigate candidate's physical-intimidation claim against MPP Randy Hillier

David Reevely

Published on: January 29, 2018 | Last Updated: January 29, 2018 5:32 PM EST

Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives have hired an investigator to probe a complaint from their candidate in the south-Ottawa riding of Carleton that she was physically accosted by Ottawa Valley MPP Randy Hillier at a party convention in Ottawa in 2016.

Goldie Ghamari, the nominated Tory candidate in the new south-Ottawa riding of Carleton, wrote on Twitter Sunday night that “a sitting #PCPO MPP harassed me, intimidated me, & used his body to bully and scare me out of getting involved in politics.”


She didn’t name the MPP, but challenged him to come forward before the story — this story — broke.

Hillier, the MPP for Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington, promptly did. The two had met at their party’s Ottawa convention in March 2016, he replied, but never had any physical contact or unpleasant words. He wished her well in her campaign and looked forward to seeing her in caucus in the next election, he wrote.


This story arises from an anonymous Twitter message I got and followed up on last week. Ghamari answered questions I asked, starting last Thursday. The two politicians tell versions of events that disagree in important ways and the Progressive Conservative party wants to get to the bottom of it.


Goldie Ghamari, the 2018 PC candidate for Carleton, photographed in January 2017. Ashley Fraser / Postmedia

“While Ms. Ghamari declined to pursue her complaint at the time, the party has now hired a third-party investigator to provide clarity on what occurred that evening. We will provide further details upon its completion,” a high-ranking PC party official said, asking not to be named because, amid the chaos of leader Patrick Brown’s departure, there’s actually nobody in the Tory party whose job it is to speak for it at the moment.

In Ghamari’s telling, Hillier noticed her outside the convention centre in the evening of March 5, 2016. She was getting fresh air and checking her messages; he was having a cigarette. He walked up, slung an arm around her shoulders and pulled her in close. Hillier is tall, stocky and solid. Ghamari is slight — five-foot-two and 110 pounds, she says.


MPP Randy Hillier, photographed in 2014. Wayne Cuddington / Ottawa Citizen

“He was smoking, his cigarette was in his left hand, and it was clear that he was drunk. It was just very obvious from the way he was walking and I could smell the alcohol on his breath,” she said. “His fingers were digging into my shoulder and his cigarette was still in his hand as well, so when he’s doing that … it was almost right in my face.”

At the time, Ghamari was on the fringes of the Progressive Conservative party, considering running for office but not declared yet. Nepean-Carleton MPP Lisa MacLeod and Carleton-Mississippi Mills MPP Jack MacLaren were close to open war for control of the Tory operation in Eastern Ontario. (MacLaren was an early Brown supporter and ally who’d been elevated in the caucus after Brown’s win; stories about a dirty comedy act he put on at a charity fundraiser were still a month away.) MacLeod’s riding was being cut up in a redistribution and she hadn’t yet said whether she intended to run in Nepean or Carleton.

In some quarters, Ghamari’s interest in running before MacLeod had made her choice was seen as gauche. She certainly was not part of MacLeod’s circle. Even after Ghamari won, MacLeod criticized her as a bad choice for the party who put a fairly safe seat at risk.

“Are you Goldie from Nepean?” Ghamari said Hillier asked. “Are you running against Lisa?”

Ghamari was surprised and confused and didn’t recognize the MPP, she said, and said no, she wasn’t.

Ghamari goes by “Goldie” but her legal name is Golsa. Also, the convention limited the number of delegates from each riding, but as is common at these things, she attended as a ringer from a riding that wasn’t using all of its allotted spots. So instead of saying that she was Goldie from Nepean, she said, her convention badge said she was Golsa from Kingston and the Islands.

“He seemed sort of shocked and he grabbed my lanyard, my name tag, and looked at it and then he was like, ‘Huh,’ and then he just walked away.”

The exchange was brief but frightening, she said.

“It doesn’t seem like a lot but that physical contact was unwanted, I didn’t know who this person was, and it was very obvious that he was intimidating me using his body,” Ghamari said. “The way the cigarette was so close to my face, and just with him being right in my face, it was just a very — I feel like if it was someone else, another woman, she would have been incredibly intimidated and might not even have run (for office).”

Hillier’s convention badge identified him as Randy and said he was an automatic delegate, as all MPPs were. That helped her identify him afterward, Ghamari said.

“I believe that it is inappropriate for someone to go up to a perfect stranger, make very intimate physical contact, where pretty much the entire side of their bodies are touching, put them in a one-armed bear-hug, bring them in close, lean in close to their face — literally within a centimetre — and have a very intimidating presence and inquire as to one’s intentions,” Ghamari said. “Especially if you don’t know that person, you don’t know how they heard about these intentions. I just think it was inappropriate.”

Hillier’s account, conveyed in an interview Monday, is different in key ways. He and Ghamari did encounter each other outside the convention centre, he said, but it was in the afternoon and the sun was still up (sunset that day was about 6 p.m.).

“There was some small chatter and pleasantries exchanged. And there was (nothing) further — I found out who she was, because up until that moment, I had no idea who she was,” Hillier said.

He’d had a beer or two but was sober at the time, he said.

“Of course — you know. It’s, at conventions, and not just conventions, I do enjoy a beer,” he said. “There was business to be done, as well as social time, so there’s no falling over drunk or anything like that.”

He never touched her or came close to it, he said: “I didn’t get closer than five feet to her.”

The two also have different versions of how the party dealt with the situation.

Ghamari said she mentioned the incident to a friend who was also involved in the party. The friend put her in touch with Bob Stanley, the party executive director (until this past weekend, when interim leader Vic Fedeli dismissed him), who set up a conference call with Nicolas Pappalardo, who was then Brown’s chief of staff (he resigned in February 2017 to rejoin his family business in Toronto).

Ghamari’s recordings of the calls have the two senior party officials questioning her for details and saying all the right things. A party MPP physically accosting someone is not OK, they told her, and promised to investigate.

She wanted a written apology saying it was wrong for Hillier to have touched her, she said, and that would be enough.

In another call among the three, Ghamari said Pappalardo reported to her that he’d asked Hillier what happened and Hillier told Pappalardo that yes, he’d spoken to Ghamari, but he never touched her. Also, he said he’d had some drinks at the convention in the evening, but their encounter was in the afternoon, not after dark. He was willing to apologize if he’d said anything to offend or concern her, but that was all.

Since Hillier had denied anything untoward happened, Pappalardo wasn’t sure what to do, Ghamari said.

Let’s see if there’s security-camera footage, Ghamari suggested, because it’ll back me up. Pappalardo and Stanley agreed. Stanley, who’d overseen the Ottawa convention, said he’d get in touch with the Shaw Centre.

The convention centre does have an extensive security-camera operation, Stanley reported, and it keeps recordings for several weeks. But the evidence on the tape was mixed.

It did show Ghamari and Hillier separately heading out the doors of the convention centre in the evening, lending support to Ghamari’s account, Stanley said. But any interaction between them outside was in a blind spot, not captured by any camera. This boiled down to a he-said-she-said story.

“I was just basically told if I wanted to take it to court, I could take it to court, and that’s up to me,” Ghamari said.

Hillier agrees that Pappalardo talked to him about Ghamari’s complaint, though he said nobody asked him for an apology.

“I was approached by Nic Pappalardo after the convention, the chief of staff of the party,” Hillier said. “He told me there was an allegation from a young woman that a middle-aged man, they didn’t know who the person was, but a middle-aged man who somewhat had a similar description to me, had intimidated a young woman in the Ontario Landowners Association hospitality suite at the convention.

“Now, of course, anyone who knows me knows that I wouldn’t be caught dead anywhere near an Ontario Landowners Association hospitality suite, nor would I be welcomed.”

Hillier was instrumental in founding the rural-populist landowners’ association but broke with them after he was elected to the legislature. In 2014, he worried publicly that Tory leadership contestants who courted their support were giving credence to a fringe element, made up of “nutbars.”

The landowners’ association does not come up on the recordings I’ve heard of her conversations with Stanley and Pappalardo. All the details she gives them are about an incident outside the convention centre. Pappalardo, in an email exchange Monday, said he didn’t remember who brought up the landowners’ suite. He said he remembers Ghamari’s complaint as focusing on something that happened during a smoke break.

Hillier and Pappalardo had a followup conversation, Hillier said.

“He told me that they reviewed all the security tapes from the convention centre and also inquired from other people who was at the Ontario Landowners Association hospitality suite, and my version of the facts were borne out,” Hillier said. “That was the end of it, essentially.”

In his Monday email, Pappalardo said “the video did show them both exiting the building in the evening and going off camera. She is seen coming back in a few minutes later.” But he agreed that whatever might have happened between them, there’s no security footage of it.

“At that time, I explained to Ms. Ghamari that Mr. Hillier had denied the incident and that I was unable to find any helpful video evidence,” Pappalardo said. “We had also concluded there were no identifiable eye witnesses. I suggested to her that under the circumstances, the ball was in her court and that she was free to launch a formal complaint under any applicable law or standard in the appropriate forum and that we would fully cooperate. Given her legal background, I had no doubt she understood her options. That was our last exchange on the subject.”

According to Hillier, Ghamari is resurrecting an old complaint for political reasons.

“We know that there’s a lot of turmoil in the party at the moment. But clearly, one would, I think it would be reasonable to believe that there’s some political motivations behind these new allegations at this time,” Hillier said. “The record is clear that Ms. Ghamari was a candidate that was selected by Patrick Brown. There was some level of dispute and consternation with her nomination. We know with what has transpired recently in the party that there were those people who were supportive of Brown and people who were less supportive. And it’s clear Ms. Ghamari and I were on different sides of this divide.”

Ghamari said she was reluctant to talk about the incident, but it’s part of an important discussion.

“I would not put this at the level of any sort of inappropriate sexual behaviour. I don’t ever want it to be perceived that way,” she said. “But I think in the sense of how women are generally treated in certain industries and certain professions, it’s something that unfortunately is far too common and I think part of the reason why women might not get into these industries as much is because of behaviour like this. I’m glad that it’s coming out, in all different areas, because I think it’s important for everyone to be treated respectfully. I think it’s important for everyone to be treated as equals. And I think everyone should have a fair chance to do whatever they want to do based on their merits and their capabilities.”


http://ottawacitizen.com/news/.....dy-hillier
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5523
Reputation: 277.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 6:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

On one hand, women insist they are the equals of men, but men don't recognize that.

On the other hand, they want to be treated like women, that is, not as men but better than men.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Mon Jan 29, 2018 8:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:
On one hand, women insist they are the equals of men, but men don't recognize that.

On the other hand, they want to be treated like women, that is, not as men but better than men.


Warren Kinsella is claiming in a post online that there is most accusations against high profile Canadian men coming but the media is sitting on them waiting for the legal ok to publish them and some of the names will shock people

at this point I don't have any reason to doubt his post , unfortuently this isn't going to end for some time
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Jan 30, 2018 11:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

( liberals want to review the sexual harassment code of conduct for mp's in Ottawa , clearly trying to turn this into more of a political issue )

Liberals want harassment code of conduct reviewed

Parliament Hill in Ottawa
Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Oct. 29, 2013. (Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS)



Rachel Aiello, Ottawa News Bureau Online Producer

@rachaiello
.
Published Tuesday, January 30, 2018 11:27AM EST


OTTAWA – The Liberals have given notice of a motion calling for a review of the current sexual harassment code of conduct for MPs.

According to a copy of the motion obtained by CTV News, the Liberals want to create a seven-member subcommittee of the House Affairs Committee, to “conduct a thorough review” of the code.

The proposed subcommittee would have four Liberal members, two Conservative members, and one New Democrat.



The motion also calls for the subcommittee to be able to call witnesses, obtain records and other evidence and documents to complete its review.

The notice of motion was given by Liberal MP Filomena Tassi at the Procedure and House Affairs Committee Tuesday.

It is expected the motion will be debated during their next scheduled meeting on Thursday.

The code was first drafted by the House affairs committee in 2015.

More to come…

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/liberals-want-harassment-code-of-conduct-reviewed-1.3781631
Bugs





Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 5523
Reputation: 277.2
votes: 8

PostPosted: Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In related news:

The openly lesbian premier of Ontario has proudly announced the appointment of Elizabeth Sheehy to the Order of Ontario, a mixed group of its finest citizens along with the Liberal 'Party's big donors.

Quote:
For over three decades Elizabeth Sheehy has been a prominent Canadian voice on legal responses to violence against women. Her pioneering research into the law’s treatment of women has helped to transform the criminal justice system, creating more effective protection for victims of sexual and domestic violence. She has fought for a systemic overhaul of our legal, political, educational, and media institutions, and conducted sweeping studies of every aspect of the intersection of law and violence against women. No other scholar in Canada demonstrates her range and breadth of knowledge.
https://commonlaw.uottawa.ca/en/news/professors-elizabeth-sheehy-michael-geist-and-allan-rock-appointed-order-ontario


Elizabeth Sheehy's chief claim to fame has been writing a book instructing lawyers how to use the 'battered woman' syndrome to defend women, specifically women who have murdered their husbands in their sleep, or some other vulnerable time.

Quote:
Barbara Kay: Prof makes bizarre plea to place battered women above the law
If women are accorded a special right to kill abusive husbands, should men be allowed to kill women under the same circumstances?

Barbara Kay
December 13, 2013
9:04 AM EST

When ideology takes up the brain space normally reserved for reason and the golden principle of equality under the law, the very best minds can go AWOL.

That seems to be the case with University of Ottawa law professor Elizabeth Sheehy, whose new book, Defending battered Women on Trial, will be released Dec 15. Professor Sheehy’s thesis is that women who experience extreme chronic abuse from their male partners should have the right to kill them pre-emptively — in their sleep, say, or when they least expect it — without fear of being charged with murder. Murder involves a mandatory minimum — 25 years for first degree murder and 10 for second-degree — and this, according to Sheehy, constitutes a “huge, huge barrier” to such women.

Sheehy’s solution is a “statutory escape hatch” that would preclude mandatory minimum sentences. In fact, Sheehy would prefer battered women be charged with manslaughter, in which case they could argue self-defence “without bearing the onerous consequence of failure.” “Why,” she asks, “should women live in anticipatory dread and hypervigilance?” She likens such women to prisoners of war, and their lives with their abusers as a similar form of captivity. Just as it is the duty of prisoners of war to kill their captors in order to escape, she claims our attitude should be, “you were right to kill to save your own life.” [....]
http://nationalpost.com/opinio.....ve-the-law


It has been described as a how-to manual for male homicides. You should know that the "battered woman syndrome" has no scientific basis. It's not a medical term, it is one that is only used in the black art of law.

The celebration of the transcendence of the white male is nearly complete.
RCO





Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 8429
Reputation: 282.7
votes: 3
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

( there is rumours going around Ottawa of a looming allegation against someone powerful however no one seems to know who that is , some are saying its trudeau himself but he of course denies it )



Mercedes Stephenson‏Verified account @CTVMercedes · 2h2 hours ago


I asked PM @JustinTrudeau if he knows who the "very, very powerful man" with affidavits against him in the @kinsellawarren blog piece is. He said "no
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1034
Reputation: 113.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bugs wrote:

It has been described as a how-to manual for male homicides.

Only by idiot misogynists.
Quote:
You should know that the "battered woman syndrome" has no scientific basis. It's not a medical term, it is one that is only used in the black art of law.

Good enough for the Supreme Court of Canada to recognize . See R vs Lavallee

BWS is not a legal defence in and of itself .
Quote:

The celebration of the transcendence of the white male is nearly complete.


Ah yes, there it is in print.

Only good against a white male, the poor white male . So sad huh?
Toronto Centre





Joined: 12 Feb 2011
Posts: 1034
Reputation: 113.6
votes: 4
Location: Toronto

PostPosted: Tue Jan 30, 2018 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RCO wrote:


I asked PM @JustinTrudeau if he knows who the "very, very powerful man" with affidavits against him in the @kinsellawarren blog piece is. He said "no


Standard answer. Expected no less.


However.... like a duck on the water, look below the surface. If there are allegations against JT then them legs be a paddlin' hard and fast.

At the juncture , no one is off the table except my brother and my father . The rest..... good luck and hope you have behaved yourself over the years.
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 7

Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum


It's just the start: more tales of the sexual pogrom

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB