October 31st, 2011

Herman Cain and the sexual harrassment allegations

So, Politico has dug up some dirt on Herman Cain.

And it’s dirt of a sort so common in our modern PC world: allegations of sexual misconduct of an unspecified nature that ended with a payout (from the National Restaurant Association).

Such charges are, quite literally, indefensible—it’s “he said she said” in the modern age, in which the victim is always right. Unfortunately, a payoff means nothing except that the organization has decided it’s cheaper to pay than to fight in a game where the deck is stacked against an alleged perpetrator.

That’s true whether the supposed perpetrator is Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, white or black. What’s more, the system encourages false claims, because the name of the accuser is protected. Even now, in the case of Cain, Politico is not releasing the accusers’ names for “privacy” reasons—although perhaps the names will leak out over time, as these things often do.

Starting way back in the 80s or even earlier, I became skeptical of all such allegations since I saw firsthand (mostly through an incident I witnessed at a university) how unfair they can be and how the deck is stacked against the accused. In the case I knew best, it shocked me to learn that all that was necessary for the charge to stick was nothing more than an assertion by the accuser that the accused had done something that made her uncomfortable. The locus of the offense was in the definition/reaction of the hearer, not any objective standard of right or wrong.

How far we’ve come from the bad old days when sexual harassment in the workplace was winked at (literally). Now the worm has turned so decisively that the accused pretty much calls the shots. This does not mean that sexual harassment doesn’t occur, or that’s it’s okay when it does. But it does mean that we should regard all such allegations with automatic suspicion (as I did with those against President Clinton, until a certain blue dress appeared).

Let’s see what has been alleged about Cain’s behavior [emphasis mine]:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.

The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association…

The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

Notice that the locus of the offense appears to have been in the perception of the accusers.

It occurs to me that, although the exact date of the Cain allegations and settlement is not specified except that it was “in the 90s,” we know it had to have been after 1996 because that was the year Cain became affiliated with the restaurant organization. So if the charges were trumped up, it would have been possible for the accusers to have gotten the idea from the Anita Hill hearings against Clarence Thomas, which had such high visibility in 1991.

Cain alleges that he didn’t even know about the payments:

“If the restaurant association did a settlement, I wasn’t even aware of it,” [Cain] claimed, “and I hope it wasn’t for much. If there was a settlement, it was handled by some of the other officers at the restaurant association.”

That is certainly possible as well.

Which enemies of Cain’s might be responsible for pushing this story? There are a host of possibilities on either side, way too many to choose from. And isn’t it interesting that Politico is refusing to go into more of the details of the allegations?:

Politico’s Jonathan Martin: “And also, what actually happened to these women as well, we want to be sensitive to that, too. It includes both verbal and physical gestures.

“These women felt uncomfortable, and they were unhappy about their treatment, and they complained to both colleagues and senior officials. In one case it involved, I think, inviting a woman up to a hotel room of Cain’s on the road … We’re just not going to get into the details of exactly what happened with these women beside what’s in the story.”

How very “sensitive” of Politico.

I imagine we’ll be hearing more about this story.

45 Responses to “Herman Cain and the sexual harrassment allegations”

  1. Scott Says:

    And Cain’s response is to break into song and belt out a gospel hymn:

    http://www.businessinsider.com/amazing-must-watch-vidoe-herman-cain-just-broke-into-song-at-the-national-press-club-2011-10?op=1

    I love it.

  2. physicsguy Says:

    And parallel with this is the Dept. of Ed letter sent out in this past spring to all higher ed institutions in which they are instructed that the new standard for sexual harrassment is no longer “beyond a shadow of a doubt”. Also the definition is no longer “persistent behavior that threatens the job performance”. Now the standard for all colleges is merely “greater than 50% evidence” and, as neo mentions, the accuser merely has to bring forth the charge based on feeling uncomfortable. The FIRE has reported 36 of the top 100 schools have already adjusted their requirements even though both FIRE and the AAUP have rejected the new standards. BHO strikes again.

  3. Book Says:

    You know, the more I hear from Cain, the more I like him. This hasn’t changed that.

    On a side note: I too have witnessed the same sort of behavior. I recently had a conversation with a gal I know, during which she proudly crowed to me about tearing into a waiter from the south who dared to call her “honey”. It doesn’t matter that this was a mom-n-pop joint and that far south, everyone is a “honey”, man or woman. She flipped out, refused to tip, and noisily made a scene in front of the other diners. Then she bragged about the incident, thinking that I would somehow admire her “standing up against sexual harassment.”

    Honestly, sometimes when liberals don’t see the boogeymen they’re looking for, they make them up to feel better about looking in the first place.

  4. RickZ Says:

    How far we’ve come from the bad old days when sexual harassment in the workplace was winked at (literally). Now the worm has turned so decisively that the accused pretty much calls the shots.
    ———–

    Same as with rape charges. Now, though, they are viewed more and more with a jaundiced eye, which does an injustice to real rape victims. Alas, too many Petras crying about wolves who raped them (when the wolf was otherwise engaged – even having an ATM receipt). Yes, the worm has turned for now (and the last two decades or so). But this, too, shall pass as we become inured to such sexual harrassment charges just as we’ve become inured to being called racist for disagreeing strongly with Obama.

    The whole legal sexual harrassment game is another fine example proving the compelling need for tort reform.

  5. Curtis Says:

    Let all those who are sick of the corporate PC vote HC.

  6. Don Carlos Says:

    Whew! for a microsecond I read HC as “Hillary Clinton.”

  7. ELC Says:

    I called this, October 17th, 2011 at 8:17 pm:

    Cain needs to have a long talk with Clarence Thomas about what the Left does to conservatives it cannot (seriously) accuse of racism.

    http://neoneocon.com/2011/10/17/cains-popularity-with-tea-partiers-doesnt-show-theyre-not-racists/#comment-275326

  8. RickZ Says:

    Book Says:

    Honestly, sometimes when liberals don’t see the boogeymen they’re looking for, they make them up to feel better about looking in the first place.
    ——

    A certain writer beat you to the punch over a hundred years ago:

    Conservative, n A statesman who is enamored of existing evils, as distinguished from a Liberal, who wishes to replace them with others. ~ Ambrose Bierce, The Devil’s Dictionary

  9. Mr. Frank Says:

    It’s no accident this was presented after Cain became the front runner as was the case with Perry. If Romney is the last man standing he’s next in line for a hatchet job.

  10. Baklava Says:

    This allegation has me re-considering my support for Herman Cain.

    NOT !

  11. foxmarks Says:

    The Big Media narrative is that Cain’s campaign is unsteady. Unsubstantiated allegations serve to drive the narrative.

    I enjoy watching all the talking heads reinforcing each other’s opinion that this shows why Cain is not a serious candidate. They really do live in a different bubble than mine.

    Those inclined toward Cain see more of what they like. It is Cain’s sincerity. To his supporters and prospects, he is establishing himself as someone unafraid to speak, while also being capable of reflection. He appears to have the character of the common man.

    Those inclined against Cain cannot find flaws fast enough. The narrative doesn’t explain why he hasn’t flamed out already. They need to turn him into an object of ridicule, but his personal story takes away their usual tactics.

  12. Indigo Red Says:

    Neo writes, “Notice that the locus of the offense appears to have been in the perception of the accusers.”

    Of course, it is and with the 1991 sanction of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Ellison v. Brady (924 F.2d 872 (9th Cir. 1991).

    The 9th Circus decided that it doesn’t matter if the alleged harasser intended to be harassing or complimentary rejecting the “reasonable person” standard used by the trial court instead opting for a “reasonable woman” argument in which the alleged victim perceived the conduct severe and pervasive enough to change the work environment so as to create an offensive environment from which sexual harassment can be found.

  13. nolanimrod Says:

    Well, now I’d guess that Cain will at least get the votes of the Duke Lacrosse team.

    Crichton wrote an entire book about using sexual harrassment charges as a weapon in the corporate world and even made his central theme the use of it (as it seems it is against Cain) pre-emptively.

    Reminds me of the treatment of another Cain (Mc) by the New York Times right after their former golden boy was nominated to oppose their current one.

    Remember that memorable bit of journalism? On page 1? A McCain former staffer thinks he may have heard part of a rumor that McCain was boffing a lobbyist?

    See what they did there?

  14. Curtis Says:

    Cain’s problems are but a subset of the corporate environment where leftists indulge themselves in criticism of anything they don’t approve of and feel safe from reprisal or discipline since the HR department, controlled by those types of people who get an HR degree in the first place, refuse to consider any charge of misconduct against their coreligionists. How could it be otherwise? HR departments are a result of government regulations directed to make a culturally Marxist society.

  15. holmes Says:

    The response from the left, especially feminists, in the wake of Thomas and Clinton scandals, is instructive. The important thing is that Democrats are champions for women, even when they denigrate and demean them. Just as they have done to Sara Palin as well. But, they can feel free to take the side here of the anonymous accusers because, even if not guilty, it’s about having the conversation (at the expense of a potentially innocent person’s reputation and career). Besides, most men are basically guilty to begin with, so an individualized assessment of facts is mostly irrelevant.

    I work in HR. We settle things like this all of the time.

  16. Michael Says:

    But, just wait and see what happens to a man who works with a bunch of women, who decide it would be fun to make him uncomfortable by talking inappropriately abut sex. Oh, best of all, ask him something about his wife in the bedroom. Not to answer is an answer. An actual answer is JUST NOT DONE.

    Remember, sexual harassment was seen as a way of making women feel uncomfortable in what was formerly a “man’s job.”

    I am seven years out from retirement. Give me strength O, Lord!

  17. Curtis Says:

    I checked out the comments on the Yahoo story on Herman Cain. Yahoo is a left rag that generally smears conservative candidates, but Yahoo comments give a pretty fair estimate of where the general public is on an issue. This one checks out good. The overwhelming opinion is for Cain and against the media. For example, the following comment was rated 37 for and only 3 against:

    i am not a Herman Cain fan but this kind of reporting has no interest to people

    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mr-cain-goes-washington-herman-cain-faces-sexual-224838634.html

  18. J.J. formerly Jimmy J. Says:

    An attempt to steer the narrative by the dems and their communications arm, the MSM. An electronic lynching, if you will.

    Everybody should watch this video at the Ace of Spades and then send it to all your correspondents.
    It unmasks the media as the shills for Obama and the dems that they are. Nothing that is in the MSM is without an agenda.
    http://minx.cc/?post=323105

    We conservatives always suspected this, but the video confirms it. No Republican can get a fair shake in the campaign and they will use any flimsy rumor or innuendo to shape the narrative. And the MSM will help them. Disgusting!

  19. Curtis Says:

    The rich get richer and the poor
    get poorer.
    Herman Cain worked hard and the poor
    work no more.
    Which one of the two assertions
    you believe:
    its you or the state the problem
    will relieve.

  20. beverly Says:

    I recently had a conversation with a gal I know, during which she proudly crowed to me about tearing into a waiter from the south who dared to call her “honey”.

    Well, Book, if she doesn’t like “honey,” there are a few other names we Southerners have in our back pocket. Like “heifer.” ;-)

  21. Gary Rosen Says:

    Cain has been a significant public figure for what, a month or two, and the press has diligently uncovered nebulous “sexual harassment” allegations from 15 years ago.

    But the Democrat VP nominee of 2004 had a freakin’ illegitimate child with some bimbo and they *never* reported it, left it to the National Enquirer.

    Hate, loathing and contempt don’t begin to describe what I think of the MFM.

  22. SteveH Says:

    Sexual harrassment laws are just another cure invented by liberals that is worse than the disease. A more common archetype of liberalism cannot be found. Just look at all the problems created by liberals and their remedies.

  23. RNB Says:

    Re: “If she doesn’t like ‘honey,’ there are a few other names we Southerners have in our back pocket.” Remember, below the Mason-Dixon Line, if a woman says “Bless your heart!” particularly sweetly, it translates out as “Bitch.”

  24. Curtis Says:

    A yahoo comment, “”Uppity”??? Rush Limbaugh is a racist white trash pig” gets 21 votes for and 33 against. That 21 to 33 ratio is the ratio that will elect the Republican candidate no matter who runs.

    Obama. The one term prez, bless his heart.

  25. Richard Aubrey Says:

    RNB. And you really, really don’t want to hear somebody say, “I’m gonna pray for you.” If you can picture a stilleto coated with anesthetic….
    Repeating: During the Clarence Thomas hearings, a woman I knew, ‘way left wing and a rape survivor, commented, “He talked dirty at the office. Big deal.”

  26. Wolla Dalbo Says:

    Part of the Left’s comprehensive Gramscian attack against bourgeois societies has, of course, been a tireless campaign against all aspects of the family, and to subvert, disrupt and sour the relationships between men and women. Because, the worse, the more fractured, disrupted, uncomfortable, painful, and tension filled these foundational relationships of our society are, the more social disorder there is, the more angry and dissatisfied people are, then, the more vulnerable and unstable our society will be, and the more receptive people in our society will be to the Left’s message of revolutionary change.

    Thus, the Left’s efforts to disrupt and subvert all of the traditional relationships, and to force them into new, abnormal, and unsatisfactory configurations, via all sorts of governmental rules and regulations, a campaign vastly aided and intensified by social pressure coming from the MSM and various cultural icons and “thought leaders.”

    I well remember one of the few “mandatory” classes I was forced to attend at my federal agency, a class on “sexual harassment” taught by a female contractor whose attitude I can best describe as a throwback to the witch hunters of Salem. She positively salivated at the thought of hunting down and catching someone who she thought was in some way a “harasser,” and forcing him (the “perp” could never be a woman, of course) to submit to her will. Thus, she told us one of her great victories, one of the high points in here career involved her barging through the closed door and into the office of a manager who–sources told her–had a playboy pinup on his wall, and forcing him to rip it down.

    As she paced up and down, with this glow of fanaticism emanating from her, I could very easily picture her in black leather Nazi uniform, boots and all, slapping her riding crop against her hand as she tramped back and forth, giving us our orders about how we would “behave” in the future.

    A key part of this class was us having to watch a film on “sexual harassment in the work place,” which featured a clueless, socially inept nebbish asking a female co-worker if she would like to go out with him when he met her at the office copying machine. She said no, he asked once more, was turned down a second time and he left; he was not intimidating or threatening in his manner, there was never any physical contact, there were no further interactions, no stalking, harassing phone calls, or notes, nothing, and yet, this was supposed to be a prime example of “sexual harassment in the workplace.”

    Obviously, they were trying to make even the most casual and normal interactions between the sexes full of tension and paranoia, to disrupt them, and to make them uncomfortable, just as the “dating codes” at universities were doing.

  27. I R A Darth Aggie Says:

    That’s true whether the supposed perpetrator is Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, white or black.

    Not so. Democrats would have demonized the accusers, revealed their identities and exposed them to harrassment and ridicule. Accused them of being skanks, sluts or nymphos. Dug up dirt on them.

  28. Curtis Says:

    FF: full-time fools. Unfortunately, that’s the description that fits the 21:33 ratio. Twenty one FF’s for every thirty three “forgotten man.” See Amity Shlaes book and her website:

    http://www.amityshlaes.com/

    What we have here is our failure to educate. We let the Colombian cartel of cultural Marxists gain access and then dominate our education and entertainment. What the Frankfurt school produced was a mass amount of FFs, full-time fools. Now we are saddled with FFs who have recently made as much of a unified Declaration of Independence as they are able.

    Why do I like Herman Cain more and more? Because he is the antithesis of an FF and FF masters, the Noam Chomskys and Cass Sunsteins of the world. Sunstein is the one most likely responsible for the White House “report blogs” since he is a major advisor to Obama. Sunstein wrote a 2008 paper that the U.S. Government employ teams of covert agents and pseudo-”independent” advocates to “cognitively infiltrate” online groups and websites.

    I recently asked myself a simple question, “Why are we experiencing this continuing economic downturn?” And there are, of course, all the macro answers, but what happens when a society reaches a tipping point ratio of FFs? (I realize this is very similar to the Cloward/Piven argument.)

    What do you do with fools? Even the Bible gives contradictory advice: Proverbs, chapter 26, verse 4 warns us “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, or you will be like him yourself.” The very next verse says “Answer a fool according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.”

    Let the market take care of the FFs and don’t provide FFs any funds or resources such as parks to “protest” in. Herman Cain spoke strongly against the “occupiers.” And his 9-9-9 plan seems to mirror the effort of the 1986 Tax Reform to broaden and simplify the tax base while eliminating loopholes and reducing the steepness of the brackets.

    But most of all, the FFs rely on the victimology of identity groups theory, a claim Herman Cain passionately refutes, both verbally and by example. There is another example here: Clarence Thomas. Justice Thomas, hardened by the ordeal of his high tech lynching, single handedly brought the Second Amendment back to life.

    Our Republic defined and purified and now needs to defend its basic creed that all men are created equal. It is appropriate that the intended victims of racism should have such singular roles in the defense of the most basic American belief that all men are created equal.

  29. Artfldgr Says:

    Such charges are, quite literally, indefensible—it’s “he said she said” in the modern age, in which the victim is always right. Unfortunately, a payoff means nothing except that the organization has decided it’s cheaper to pay than to fight in a game where the deck is stacked against an alleged perpetrator.

    yeah.. and feminism is the reason… no?
    i mean who set it up that way?
    Whose leaders side with the marxists and communists? whose leaders ADMIT it…

    funny, but mein kampf was “My struggle”
    feminism was just mein kampf for women..

    feminism “my struggle” on google gets 260,000 matches..

    now we have a president, who played them using the same effeminate methods of hitler straight out of his book… a leadership that used rifienstahl methods, and even promised great pay offs for feminists… like 20 new offices for women and affirmative action

    except that they are now the majority of managers, the majority earning degrees..

    so in all that, the society is starting to look like a chinese royal city…

    but now we are revealed that those harridens spoke truth… they DO Want communist state… they get great pay offs… after all, you can accuse a man and if they cant find something to prove him innocent (And even if they can) he is blighted…

    but hey… we have a president who keeps quoting the nazis… with father coughlins social justice… and huey longs share the wealth…

    and now the birth rate has declined so fast its 20 years early in its failure compared to others…

    the difference between a chess master and a regular player, is that the chess master understands chess in X moves means you lose no matter what you do…

    while the regular player plays on regardless, and believing there is always a saving grace.

    keep refusing to look at the other states that were in our position… and how they got there…

    its the equivalent of a ostrich with his head in the sand… but that method in one way or4 another seems to be the only one that is pc…

    and we know who keeps the pc thinking stuff maintained… who made personal access ways out of manhole covers… but did nothing to change garbage men to garbage persons… they chanted language, and even changed the burden of proof…

    Cain is guilty until he proves his innocence..
    that is not a male concept of justice but a feminist one…. and a communist one… funny how the leaders all claim to that.

    but notice… women are not represented in communist states… and feminists are waking up to that here, thinking its a mistake

    but do you really trust those who betrayed their own? does it matter if the betrayers of their own think otherwise?

    all that matters is the outcome…

    and the outcome is that thanks to them, no politiican they dont agree with (and is communist) can oppose them or even attempt it without their permission, or a willingness to lose to that kind of bs.

    most men would rather just walk off the field, and that IS what they are doing… most here are not young men and are not connected to them and dont have a clue

    Where do we see radical feminism ascendant? It is on television, where nearly
    every major offering has a female “power figure” and the plots and characters emphasize
    inferiority of the male and superiority of the female. It is in the military, where expanding
    opportunity for women, even in combat positions, has been accompanied by double
    standards and then lowered standards, as well as by a decline in enlistment of young men,
    while “warriors” in the services are leaving in droves. It is in government-mandated
    employment preferences and practices that benefit women and use “sexual harassment”
    charges to keep men in line. It is in colleges where women’s gender studies proliferate
    and “affirmative action” is applied in admissions and employment. It is in other
    employment, public and private, where in addition to affirmative action, “sensitivity
    training” is given unprecedented time and attention. It is in public schools, where “self
    awareness” and “self-esteem” are increasingly promoted while academic learning
    declines. And sadly, we see that “a woman’s right to choose” leads many fellow
    Americans, including many with stewardship of public law and culture, to believe it is
    “the right thing to do” to allow the most helpless to be put to death. – Dr. Gerald L. Atkinson

    bed see bed
    make bed
    lie in bed

    nothing us males can do…
    if we do, we are pigs and so on
    if we dont, the women lose..

    ie… the end result is a fait accompli unless women change their minds in time.

    and demographically, its too late..

    when the smartest are either barren of have less than three kids, and the not so smart and rutting have 5 to more than 12 on the dime of the feminist woman working to give the socialist state her money…

    she has debased herself, her children, caused them misery, poverty, broken families, as the norm… and so on and so on, and so on.

    while not all women do… all the ones that count do… and the ones that would oppose, dont have the gumption… or the wherewithal, so their existence is not useful other than as the exception that PROVES the rule

    how many of the people at OWS are “studies” majors? and who started that and made it required?

    so…
    again… its not a mens world, its a womans world, and as long as she thinks its a mans world, the idiot leader get to steer

    [edited for length by n-n]

  30. Artfldgr Says:

    There is no doubt in the media that the “man of today” is expected to be a touchyfeely
    subspecies who bows to the radical feminist agenda. He is a staple of Hollywood,
    the television network sitcoms and movies, and the political pundits of talk shows.5 The
    feminization is becoming so noticeable that newspapers and magazines are picking up on
    it. For example, the Washington Times and National Review magazines combined to tell
    us that “behind the breezy celebration of ‘guy stuff’ in today’s men’s magazine lurks a
    crisis of confidence. What does it mean to be masculine in the 90s?” It is revealed that
    today’s men’s magazines (Esquire, GQ, Men’s Health, Men’s Fitness, Men’s Journal,
    Details, Maxim, Men’s Perspective)”are all geared to a new feminized man….”6

    and Cain does not fit that
    does he?

    he is not an effeminate like hitler
    he is not willing to seduce a feminized society, much as hitler said society was like and described how to do that to such. he does not spout the ideas of huey long, and father coughlin and hate jews… like good feminists and their lakeys do…

    care to see rosanne barr’s photo shoot where she puts gingerbread jews into the oven while wearing a nazi stage uniform?

    how about helen thomas? she WAS a feminist icon and there are tons of articles and even her commentary on it..

    If this “feminization” trend were driven only by radical feminists seeking to pull
    down a perceived male-dominated hierarchy, there would be more hope that the cycles of
    history would move America toward a stable accommodation between men and women.
    But the drive is deeper, and it will not be satisfied by any accommodation. The radical
    feminists have embraced and been embraced by the wider and deeper movement of
    cultural Marxism. For dedicated Marxists, the strategy is to attack at every point where an
    apparent disparity leaves a potential constituency of “oppressed” persons – in this case
    women, who are the largest of all constituencies. Cultural Marxists, men and women, are making the most of it, and the theory developed by the Frankfurt School provides the ideology.

    and of course.. most just want to copy all the failures from history and wing it.

    ever read “The Origins of
    the Family, Private Property and the State” buy engels? its claims that the better thing is a matrairchy… now remember, these same people also said they wanted to destroy capitalism… of course one point is forgotte with the next, and so they think the idea of a matriarchy is a good one, not a facilitator of the end…

    “The Feminization of the Democrats.” The Wall Street Journal, Sept. 9, 1996. Kristol
    reported that 50% of the Democratic convention delegates were women. Women were described as tending to be more sentimental, more risk-adverse, and less competitive than men, and also more permissive and less judgmental.

    The “authoritarian personality,” studied in the 1940s and 1950s by American
    followers of the Frankfurt School, prepared the way for such psychological warfare
    against the male gender role. The aim was promoted by Herbert Marcuse and others
    under the guise of “women’s liberation” and under the New Left movement in the 1960s.
    Evidence that psychological techniques for changing personality are intended to focus in
    particular on the emasculation of the American male has also been provided by Abraham
    Maslow, founder of “third force humanist psychology” and promoter of
    psychotherapeutic techniques in public school classrooms. 8 He wrote that “the next step
    in personal evolution is a transcendence of both masculinity and femininity to general
    humanness.”

    where does cain fit in all this?

    The Frankfurt School had devised the concept of designating the opponents of the
    Marxist cultural revolution as “authoritarian characters.” According to available
    accounts:
    There was a meeting of American scholars at a conference on religious and racial
    prejudice in 1944. Over the next five years, a Frankfurt School team under the
    direction of Max Horkheimer conducted in-depth social and psychological
    profiles of Americans under a project entitled “Studies of Prejudice.” One of the
    results was a book entitled “The Authoritarian Personality” by Theodor Adorno,
    et al, that summarized one of the largest public opinion surveys ever undertaken
    in the United States. It was published in 1950, and conformed to the original
    Critical Theory in every respect. As a document which testified to the belief
    system of the Frankfurt School revolutionaries it was essentially anti-God, anti-
    Christian, anti-family, anti-nationalist, anti-patriot, anti-conservative, antihereditarian,
    anti-ethnocentric, anti-masculine, anti-tradition, and anti-morality.
    All of these are elements in critical theory. 11

    so.. cain is an authoritarian under adorno and so they will do anything to attack him…

    they knew that there is always a selfish greedy manipulative woman in the modern wings willing to sell out a man and have him falsely accused. shall i point out duke? and many others?

    “Cultural Marxism,” as preached by the Frankfurt School alumni in the U.S., is being
    implemented by the elite Boomers. This has laid the foundation for and spurred the
    widely popular and destructive concepts of “affirmative action,” “multiculturalism” and
    “diversity.” One can’t escape these terms today. They have grown from the study of
    anti-Semitism and discrimination by the Institute for Social Research during the 1940s
    and the systematic infusion of the language of “discrimination,” “civil rights,” ‘women’s
    rights,” and other “minority rights” into American culture.

    so unless they throw off the mantle of the marxists… nothing is going to change for the better..

    The Frankfurt School scholars preached:
    Even a partial breakdown of parental authority in the family might tend to
    increase the readiness of a coming generation to accept social change.


    The transformation of American culture envisioned by the cultural Marxists goes
    further than pursuing gender equality. Embodied in their agenda is “matriarchal theory,”
    under which they purpose to transform American culture to be female-dominated. This is
    a direct throwback to Wilhelm Reich, a Frankfurt School member who considered
    matriarchal theory in psychoanalytic terms. In 1993, he wrote in “The Mass Psychology
    of Fascism” that matriarchy was the only genuine family type of “natural society.”

    could be why we are moving to a fascist state and the ladies keep copying the Nazis…

  31. Artfldgr Says:

    The Mass Psychology of Fascism
    By WILHELM REICH
    http://www.whale.to/b/reich.pdf

    The reactionary cultural philosopher has only the alternatives of resigning and becoming skeptical or of trying to
    turn back the wheel of history by “revolutionary” means. If, however, one recognizes the fact that the decline of
    the old culture does not signify by any means the decline of civilization as such, but only that of a certain
    civilization, the authoritarian, one arrives automatically at a different evaluation of positive and negative cultural
    elements. It is a matter of finding out the revolutionary attitude toward those phenomena which the reactionary
    considers symptoms of decline. It is characteristic, for example, that [73] in ethnology political reaction favors the
    patriarchal theory while the revolutionary world adheres to the matriarchal theory. This divergent sociological
    attitude toward historical facts corresponds to hitherto undiscovered sex-economic processes. Matriarchy—a
    historically proven fact—is not only the organization of natural work democracy but also that of the sexeconomically
    natural society.2 Patriarchy, on the other hand, has not only an authoritarian economic organization,
    but also a catastrophically chaotic sex-economic organization.

    the feminists being socialists are made up mostly of fascists and communists… evne if they dont know it.

    HOW many studies courses point out that the pedigree of thought was NAZI? what would the women in a studies course do to a man who dared to point it out?

    fro reich.. the nazi feminist

    The patriarchal authoritarian sexual order developed from the fundamental changes taking place in late
    matriarchy, such as economic independence of the chief’s family from the maternal tribe, increasing barter trade
    between the tribes, development of the means of production, etc. This patriarchal sexual order then became the
    basis of authoritarian ideology by depriving women, children and adolescents of sexual freedom, by making a
    commodity out of sexuality, and by putting sexuality in the service of economic suppression. Under these
    circumstances, sexuality, in fact, came to be distorted into something demoniacal which had to be restrained.
    Under the pressure of patriarchal demands, the chaste sensuality of matriarchy appeared as the raging of sinister
    elements. The Dionysic turned into “sinful desire,” into something which patriarchal culture can experience only
    as chaotic and “filthy.” With the development of distorted, lascivious, sexual structures, patriarchal man becomes
    enmeshed in an ideology in which “sexual” becomes inextricably associated with “filthy,” “low” and
    “demoniacal.”

    see… if you dont want women to be sexualized as children and have group sex and all that stuff we are doign and using the schools as social engineering points..

    then your a religious reactionary authoritarian person…

    maybe understanding what they are following would have helped. but i doubt it…

    telling them now dont help…

    but living the nazi ideology sans the label is just as bad as drinking arsenic unlabled… the label doesnt change anything other than it makes the poison more palatable if its taken off.

    The conflict which now exists
    between nature and a “higher” morality disturbs the capacity for gratification. Sexual guilt feelings disturb the
    natural course of the orgastic process. This results in sexual stasis, and the dammed-up sexual energies seek an
    outlet through all kinds of pathological channels. Neuroses, perversions and antisocial sexuality become
    permanent social phenomena. Infantile and adolescent sexuality, which in the original work democracy of
    matriarchy was affirmed and socially underwritten, comes to be systematically suppressed.

    you see… having gay sex, or sex with children is good… and it was the evil patriarchy…

    too bad the ladies in studies courses never question their teacher (for fear) and never decided to look up who is who…

    to read it is to read amodern feminist!!!!!!!!!!

    Every tribe which developed
    out of a matriarchal order into a patriarchal order had to change the sexual structure of its members. This was
    necessary because the shift of power and wealth from the democratic clans to the authoritarian family of the chief
    was achieved essentially by means of suppressing the sexuality of the members of society. In this manner, sexual
    suppression came to be an essential part of the division of society into classes.

    so… men oppressed women… they debased sex and made it dirty… whichis why women after a friday night gang bang feel so good and now dont mind if their mates cheat on them… right?

    is it any wonder that living nazi ideology is bringing us to nazi fascism, state control, etc?

    so why make women unmarraible? so that their mates and they find they have to mix… why do that?
    [edited for length by n-n]

  32. Artfldgr Says:

    COULTER: I’m saying horrible, angry, feminist women hate conservative black men because they can’t accuse us of racism for supporting, you know pro-life positions, or supporting Herman Cain over Obama. Yeah, coincidentally, the two utterly innocent conservatives who have been falsely accused are both conservative blacks.

  33. neo-neocon Says:

    I R A Darth Aggie: In the quote you mentioned, I’m talking about the legal proceedings such as those Cain faced when he was in the workplace, not how the allegations are differentially treated later by the press when the person enters politics.

  34. njartist49 Says:

    …opting for a “reasonable woman” argument in which the alleged victim perceived the conduct severe and pervasive enough to change the work environment so as to create an offensive environment from which sexual harassment can be found.

    That statement alone makes “sexual harassment” exclusively a female complaint: like hysteria.

    Has anyone met a reasonable woman?

  35. neo-neocon Says:

    njartist49: I don’t know all that many reasonable people, actually.

    But I’m one of them, and I’m most definitely a woman.

  36. Wolla Dalbo Says:

    Neo–that brings up the interesting question of what effect the law’s “reasonable person” standard has on legal decisions over time when the culture changes so radically and dramatically/is so perverted/subverted/decadent when compared to the culture of the past. that what a “reasonable person” thinks is reasonable today would never have been thought “reasonable” in the past but, in fact, would have decidedly been thought “crazy” and totally “unreasonable.”

  37. neo-neocon Says:

    Wolla Dalbo: yes, the “reasonable person” (or, in its initial manisfestation, the “reasonable man”) standard is much easier to figure out in a more culturally (and morally) homogeneous and stable society.

  38. Curtis Says:

    But I’m one of them!

    Yes, I do agree with that. I trust you, but . . .

    Reasonableness by fiat?

    Anyone who makes a claim they are reasonable has violated the first law of reasonableness. Surely, I sense an ironic statement?

  39. Baklava Says:

    I
    can
    barely
    read
    the
    comments
    sections

    with
    art
    fl
    dgr

    contributing
    to
    the
    detioriation
    of
    my
    scroll
    wheel

    on
    my
    mouse.

    Why can’t
    you
    be concise?

    like
    Mr Frank
    or
    Wolla Dalbo
    or
    IRA Darth Aggie
    or
    Curtis
    physicsguy

    I
    can
    read
    what
    they
    write.

    Concise
    is
    key.

  40. njartist49 Says:

    @Baklava
    I find ArtflDgr’s entries to be interesting and am willing to peruse them. learn to use the scroll bars at the side to move more quickly through the length of the articles.

  41. holmes Says:

    Sexual Harassment is mostly a law for women. It’s court-constructed law as “sex” ties to gender. But, the key component is that remarks have to be “unwelcome.” Severe and pervasive and unwelcome. Most men welcome sexual comments, even if not actually interested, as it’s flattering. And even if not flattering, they are typically comfortable enough in positions of authority that they know it’s not worth getting someone fired for. (Though that is a mistake…the woman will regret the comments, feel ashamed, and likely later file a complaint. Best to file/document it first. Free advice ;)

  42. Baklava Says:

    nj,

    That was condescending. I’ve been in IT for 24 years. I do not need to learn how to use scroll bars.

    I can learn to not read the comments section.

    I don’t need to be treated this way.

    I should be able to make a reasonable concise and constructive comment without being attacked.

    All subsequent comments from you are now unread….

  43. Foxfier Says:

    Baklava -
    Oh, please. You complained because you find ArtflDgr’s comments annoying, so njartist49 complained about your complaint and pointed out a rather simple solution. You’re not exactly the first person to spend more time and effort to type up a complaint about him than it takes to just skip his stuff.

    If a clearly stylistic technique suggestion is just too horrifically “condescending” for you to handle, maybe you should learn to not rad comment sections. Humor is commonly encountered, and folks might expect you to pick up on the broadly absurd.

  44. Baklava Says:

    Foxfier,

    I’ve been here for years.

    It’s fairly reasonable to see that his comments are EXCESSIVE.

    I like him.

    I simply asking him to cut them shorter and make them more concise.

    I don’t need to be referred to somebody as needing to ‘learn’ how to use a mouse.

    It’s reasonable for me to think that he can make his comments shorter.

    Or I can do what I’ve been doing the last few months and frequent the comments section less often…

    There are two things that are hard to do in life for humans:
    1) Hear another human being – There are a few humans who have commented on the length of these comments.

    2) Treat each other with respect – It is reasonable and respectful for me to ask someone to shorten the comments as a frequent commenter and reader. It is not reasonable to treat me as if I don’t know how to use the scroll.

    Nothing is too condescending for me. I can handle anything.

    But… I can also point out that the behavior is inappropriate and its better to listen to other human beings than not listen.

    This is my last post on this – but I do reserve the right to ask art to try to be more concise.

    :)

  45. Foxfier Says:

    I don’t need to be referred to somebody as needing to ‘learn’ how to use a mouse.

    His(?) suggestion was on how to use the scroll BAR at the side of the screen, not the mouse. You were the one talking about the mouse scroll.

    There’s a third thing that is hard for people to do, related to your second one– put forth a tiny bit of extra effort to make someone else’s day nicer, rather than a lot of effort to strike back at them daring to annoy you.
    You could have done that by moving your hand over an inch or three and hitting the “page down” key a few times. Instead, you’ve taken the extra effort of three whole posts to make it worse.

    Given that you clearly value your own entitled sense of “respect” above taking a tiny step to let someone do something that makes them happy, I’m more sympathetic to Artfldgr than I have been in weeks.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>








Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge