Sexual Harassment And More

[Snowwalker]

, I am wondering what "good old days" Joe refers, it seems to me like the good old days involved district attorneys sexually harassing teenage girls.

If you dig around you will find lots of "Films" that got shown in school. A good number are cautionary tales for both Boys and Girls, and they all talked about proper conduct between Boys, Girls, women and men. Manners, respect and a common sense way of acting. That is that good old days he is talking about. He also knows they didn't get it right every time. How do you know Joe didn't march and fight for civil rights in the 50's and 60's? Joe Served in Korea, and lots of the ones that came home, didn't like how black veterans were treated. It was a real slap in the face of many to be told the man they fought beside was trash or less then human.

[Roper]

Unless you've been in that boat , people don't understand the anger that builds over the years until it explodes.

I don't doubt being sexually abused would be enough fuel to kill someone. I just don't believe the Mendez boys. I see them as rich, entitled, and highly manipulative.

[BurlyGirl]

As a woman I don't find that hard to understand at all. Takes great courage to report sexual abuse and if someone leads the way that makes it so much easier. Especially hard when you are young as opposed to 50,60,70.

I agree. You see it all the time, people are more likely to ignore something that is wrong because they think it's easier or the idea of outing an abuser makes them uncomfortable. However, there is power in numbers and when one person is brave enough to say something, it usually encourages others to voice their concerns. This isn't specific to sexual abuse. Even in an office, someone may see something that should be addressed or changed but they feel it isn't their place to bring it up. As soon as one person addresses it, the ice is broken and people tend to chime in. So while I'm not surprised when this happens in, for example, an office and discussing policy, equipment, etc. , I am always disappointed when people have the knee-jerk reaction to judge or have disbelief concerning the topic of sexual misconduct, with the argument being, "well, what took you so long to say something? Why are you coming forward now?" There shouldn't be an expiration date on the truth.

[trimmer21]

I agree. You see it all the time, people are more likely to ignore something that is wrong because they think it's easier or the idea of outing an abuser makes them uncomfortable. However, there is power in numbers and when one person is brave enough to say something, it usually encourages others to voice their concerns. This isn't specific to sexual abuse. Even in an office, someone may see something that should be addressed or changed but they feel it isn't their place to bring it up. As soon as one person addresses it, the ice is broken and people tend to chime in. So while I'm not surprised when this happens in, for example, an office and discussing policy, equipment, etc. , I am always disappointed when people have the knee-jerk reaction to judge or have disbelief concerning the topic of sexual misconduct, with the argument being, "well, what took you so long to say something? Why are you coming forward now?" There shouldn't be an expiration date on the truth.

No,there certainly shouldn't be an "expiration date on the truth,but,after all that time ,how the heck do you prove the allegations? As it stands,right now,other than a "she said,he said",there simply isn't any concrete evidence . The only trial taking place is by an extremely biased media whipping up public sentiment which in and of itself is very troubling.
The one fundamental truth is that when someone makes an accusation that can alter the course of someone's life (or history,for that matter),they bloody well better be able to back up the claim with solid evidence and if they can't,must be prepared to assume the consequences. If they get sued into oblivion,oh,well.

[jaycee]

No,there certainly shouldn't be an "expiration date on the truth,but,after all that time ,how the heck do you prove the allegations? As it stands,right now,other than a "she said,he said",there simply isn't any concrete evidence . The only trial taking place is by an extremely biased media whipping up public sentiment which in and of itself is very troubling.
The one fundamental truth is that when someone makes an accusation that can alter the course of someone's life (or history,for that matter),they bloody well better be able to back up the claim with solid evidence and if they can't,must be prepared to assume the consequences. If they get sued into oblivion,oh,well.

When there are several complainants coming forward and making accusations about a person along the same lines , then there has to be truth in the matter, it would then be up to the accused to disprove the accusations.
There is also the matter of others knowing about the accused persons behavior but staying silent about it till some one brave enough comes forward and says we have had enough, it has to stop, there are then enough people around that will come forward [not necessarily of their own volition ] to give evidence of the fact.
Some of these would be part of "the old boys club" that knew about it, but kept quiet, now that the news is out, they see that this old boy is no longer of any use to them , they will turn on him, happens all the time.

[BIG MAC]

Just finally reading this and you hit the NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD. I think last year someone commented that he had made 2 or 3 posts somewhere else on the forum. Probably the fishing section. # 1 Shift Disturber on the forum.

I was just about to post the same. I've been around a few internet forums and Joe is the best troll I've seen. Knows how to push buttons, but resonates with enough people to gather some support. Never crosses the lines however, but can walk right along it. Seriously, how many 80+ year old men do you know that post regularly on the internet, long, well worded sentences, with proper punctuation and links? Oh yeah, and Joe never posts anything that contributes to the forum. Ever seen a pictures or tails of Joe on his trips to 'North of the Border'?

Just stop responding, he'll go away. Joe is most likely a 41 year old, single, white guy.....and I could go on, but that isn't likely productive.

[Fox]

Just finally reading this and you hit the NAIL RIGHT ON THE HEAD. I think last year someone commented that he had made 2 or 3 posts somewhere else on the forum. Probably the fishing section. # 1 Shift Disturber on the forum.

When he does post in other places, the "wild boars shot in Naven" comes to mind he went off accusing them of having the wrong type of pets and wasting good bacon, just to stir the pot.

[Snowwalker]

When he does post in other places, the "wild boars shot in Naven" comes to mind he went off accusing them of having the wrong type of pets and wasting good bacon, just to stir the pot.

Yes he is good at getting under "your" skin fox....

[Fox]

Yes he is good at getting under "your" skin fox....

I am not the only one, I am just done sitting back and reading the crap.

[trimmer21]

............. it would then be up to the accused to disprove the accusations.

Back on topic......that's not the way it works,though,jaycee. It's never up to the accused to prove their innocence. It's up to the accusers to prove guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. That's not happening,here,because time (in this case 40 years) has clouded memories,evidence has been lost (if there ever was any in the first place) and trial is taking place by allegations and innuendo in the media.