Good for Aaron Lewis!

But he's still a Tea Bagger. And his music is terrible. Maybe he could address the conservative narrative on sexism and sexual assault. His party would be the first to deny an abortion to a rape victim. They blame the victim. But he did step up when it happened in front of his own eyes, and I commend that.

but he doesn't claim the Tea Party:

"...Lewis, who says he's not a Tea Party member as much as he's a Constitutionalist...

"Well, I'm pretty outspoken as to my political views, and how far this country is from what it's supposed to be right now," Lewis says. "I very strongly believe in the Constitution and I believe in the limited powers it puts forth. I believe that every person in this country would be better off if we went back to having the federal government do what it's supposed to do, and stop sticking its nose in places that it has no authority or right to be sticking it." http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/954757/stainds-aaron-lewis-talks-tea-party-goes-country-on-new-ep

The distinction is one of degrees, I guess. Nonetheless, I think we need more people of all political stripes speaking out against the mistreatment of women.

He doesn't want government "sticking its nose in places that it has no authority or right to be sticking it."  Yet he is fine with government sticking its nose in a woman's uterus.

But I agree. We need everyone to speak out when they see mistreatment of women.

Please explain. I barely knew who Aaron Lewis was before today and I am, by no means, defending his politics. But he did a good thing during that performance, and I believe we need more people of all political stripes doing the right thing.

Most of the people I've talked to who claim they are 'Constitutionalist' or 'strict Constitutionalist' don't seem to know what is in the Constitution.

a doorman at whom someone had thrown a bowl of tomato soup.

Even when I saw that it's supposed to be "Staind" (without the "e&quot I can't say I know who these guys are.

I may know a song or two if I heard it, but looking at their history on Wikipedia, they apparently became popular when I wasn't listening to a lot of new music of the time.

I was in grad school and then shortly after became a new parent, so I completely missed them and their scene for the most part.

Don't like his politics, but good on him for berating those idiots in the crowd.

What the HELL makes guys think this is OK? Have they been living under a fucking rock their whole lives? Have they NEVER had a woman they respect? This kind of stuff just makes my blood boil.

They see girls like the one they molested, and many other girls and women, as sex objects. Less than human. Just things to be ogled, harassed, or used.

Daughter, Sister, ...." etc.

How many times have we heard guys say they suddenly developed empathy once they had a daughter?

Because without that identifying tag linking us to a guy, guys have a real hard time thinking of women and girls as fellow human beings.

And, once you've got tingly man parts in the equation, cognition, respect, empathy goes right into the dumpster.

"Women they know and respect" fall into another category altogether.

There's no way in hell that I'm giving Glenn Beck's site any clicks.

The clicks put money in Beck's pocket.

Not the OP.

Not the other members for letting it slide.

It was I... for not just googling it on my own.

It's THAT simple.

I'm going to guess that my low post count is part of it. Despite that I've been on this site since 2003.

I'm not.

A lot of people click the link on an OP without realizing where it goes. Clicks to the Blaze fund Beck's hate mongering. We should not be doing that.

I am sure the only reason Beck ran this story was because that Stained guy is a right wing anti-abortion zealot, as someone pointed out up the thread. Being forced to give birth at 15 is a lot worse than being groped while crowd surfing at 15. Yet Stained will never stop a concert for that.

Beck never covers anything of substance, unless it's a "Even a broken clock is right twice a day" kind of thing like we have here.

I'm much more focused on the fact that he stood up for this girl than which party he's with, what link is in the OP, etc.

The OP acknowledged it was a dodgy source, which made it easy to decide not to click it.

Given that links to racist and misogynist hate sites have been left to stand, it seems community standards has spoken on the link issue.

I can't believe we have a Men's Group. What's next, a White People's Group?

Just because standards have fallen doesn't mean we should snark on people who point that out, like you did with tenderfoot.

I normally love your posts. I'm really disappointed with your efforts here.

I'm gonna send you a PM.

I'll tell you what I'm disappointed in.

an obscenity laden rant. I'm LOL mostly because I'm a senior citizen who came of age in a culture where f***k and "s**t became normal words in many female , and most male vocabularies. My mother and grandmother( or would pretend to, to be socially correct) would get faint on hearing these words. My dad and grandfather would beg apologies if they blurted them out in mixed company. The word "friggen" appeared in Norman Mailer's works. Whoa. In college in the Sixties, a lot of us , English and language majors, absorbed the idea that taboo words were just a combination of letters, taboo only if they implied disrespect (such as derogatory terms for women), but, "s**t".etc. used as an adjective or or exclamation was just a matter of cultural conditioning. We even made up some meaningless words and pretended that they were obscenities in other parts of the country.

Unreal...

taken the wrong way. 1) the comment was tongue in cheek. 2) the comment was bemused musing (if you understand what that is). 3) the comment should have been self-explanatory in context. 4) "honor" was used in quotes for want of a better word. 5) since when do quotation marks denote "scary" WTF? 6) there was no demeaning of the disrespect to the young woman, the comment was NOT about that. 7) the language was NOT offensive to me personally, which should have been clear. 8) the comment was JUST A PERSONAL REFLECTION on the irony of the overuse of the word F**K these days, and especially ironic within the context of the situation. I was shocked to see the number of replies so quickly. I was more shocked to see how misunderstood my comment was, and how the irony was completely missed by most, even with my further explanation concerning the use of such language in the modern day.

it's hard to see how its intent could be misinterpreted. Most of those who replied seemed to get hung up after the first sentences, or particularly right after the quotes around the word honor.

or even "scare" as opposed to more relevant applications.

Wow. It's difficult for me to find anything "LOL" about this story.

or not offended by the assault?

Scare quotes around honor? That's bullshit right there, about 3 different ways.

the three types of bullshit.

The second one's ok, though.

At least in civilized countries it doesn't.

Jeebus.

have to do with "honor," in part

NOTHING.

A woman or girl does not lose her 'honor' because some pig assaults them.

This is the 21st century, not the 16th.

How can you possibly not understand this?

He protected the girl/victim. He didn't protect anything of hers, he protected her.

A woman's body is not some thing that can be separated from her as a person.

quotation marks around-- honor?

to denounce violence.

use this same language every day as an exclamation or adjective and don't feel we're assaulting anyone, in the context here, it is meant to verbally batter, as it should have been.

job of making it

It's clear that you were attempting to imply something else, and an archaic use of 'honor'.
But boy, that post really came across as blaming the victim, even if that's not how you intended it, and that is why the strong reaction.

Quite a number of posters reached the same conclusion I did when I read that first post.

Or did you just react to a few words or sentences or a couple of quotation marks? If you read carefully enough to understand the ENTIRE point of the post, you would realize it really wasn't about the victim, her "honor" (the quotes should have warned you not to take the word so literally), or the use of the fuck word.

Because um... Yeah.


Yes I read your whole post. I also replied about the use of honor before you replied to my OTHER objection upthread. Were you going to return to that, or ignore it?

Course language! Oh, Heavens, no!

in the same spirit? If the latter, thanks.

As if calling someone a "fucking asshole" were one one-thousandth the offense that groping them against their will is.

Drunk and high as a fucking skunk too LOL

So there!

Last edited Tue Jun 3, 2014, 12:13 PM - Edit history (1)

seems like some sort of sexual assault was stopped with some language understood in the place where it was occurring. A good thing imo.

Instead of being outraged, they stand there and cheer like mindless cattle as he's pointing out that a child is getting molested right in front of them.

"YAAAAAY! We love you AARON YAAAAAAAAAAAY! MOOOOOOO!!!!"

The sooner the population is reduced, the better off the future will be.

Worst. Band. Ever.

Don't know much else of theirs.

One might almost call it a Creed.


[font color="white"]XXX[/font]
[font color="white"]XXXXXX[/font]
[font color="white"]XXXXXXXXX[/font]
[font color="white"]XXXXXXXXXXXX[/font]

Big kudos to him for stopping and addressing it. But... mind-numbingly idiotic of him to threaten to set the crowd on the assholes. Could have easily sparked a very, very ugly situation.

you can see her in the you tube a little, she was head down, legs up about 15 people back from the stage.

And I agree with him. I also don't think it matters how old she is, it just makes it more of a crime.

From the great band Big Country: