They probably have inside information on how bad it's going to be, and are trying to figure out how to weather the shitstorm.

the opposition. Also, maybe trying to prevent the release of further proof, for whatever idiots still need it, of Trump's low and sleazy character.

The next 30 days are going to be a huge nail biter. I can't wait to see Trump squirm from people having the audacity to use his words against him.

Last edited Sat Oct 8, 2016, 08:32 PM - Edit history (1)

between sexist (annoying)
misogynist (threatening)
and
rapist (dangerous).

Trump hovers between sexist and misogynist. But there's no evidence that he's a rapist.

Frankly, I think this quick drive to disown Trump is hypocritical, given that many Republican women know or live with sexist/misogynistic men and are used to it.

I do not see ANY Trump supporters dumping him for this. There may even be a few macho, woman-hating pigs who decide to vote for him.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am editing this post to add a story from June 2016 about a woman who states that Trump raped her when she was 13. You would think that this story would be resurfacing...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-bloom/why-the-new-child-rape-ca_b_10619944.html

I think they'll very much dump those that they perceive as traitors to Donald. Some tight races may now end up going to us because of this. That's a win in my book.

Trump's discription of his behavior is sexual harassment and sexual assault.

Not making light of Trump, a supposed rapist and clear misogynist, I cannot see sexism and misogyny as the same thing. Sexists don't see women as equal, but there is no malice.

For example, a sexist might not think that a woman is entitled to equal pay as a man. There's no hate there. There's a clear misunderstanding of the demographics of America in which a substantial portion of the population are families with women breadwinners. So it's NECESSARY. But men who are breadwinners may not see it.

A sexist may not want to know about women's reproductive organs, and may see women's reproductive issues as insignificant. No hate. Just misunderstanding, miseducation, years of conditioning.

Sexists often can be educated.

Misogynists dislike women. Degrade women. Treat women with disdain. They may not rape, but they will grope, and feel entitled. Misogynists make women feel uncomfortable and at risk. Sexists just make women annoyed.

there is MALICE

I am not scared of them. Not even worried about them. Just annoyed.

According to the definitions.

They both describe behavior that's more than merely annoying.

"Sexism"--the term and the issue--should have all the impact that "Racism" has.

Who are you trying to excuse, or explain away?

Abolitionists were racists. They are a major reason why we aren't still slaves. But they did not see black people as equals. Should we go about denouncing them or applauding them? I choose to applaud their efforts while acknowledging their racism. What I'm sure of is that they did not hate us.

I have known sexists who have no hate. I think of them as misguided at best. Maybe "old school". I think they need educating.

As an engineer, I have been a woman in a man's world for nearly 30 years. I have heard some sexist things, but I am happy to say, I have not encountered malice. I think I have been lucky.

As a result, I distinguish. I'm not sure that I'm trying to excuse or explain away. I guess I look at it as picking my battles.

I have a friend who worked with REAL sexists. They belittled her at every turn, used her for her talents, gave her the worst projects, and generally treated her like "sh*t". I think they hated her, and especially hated her because she was good at what she did. The word "misogynist" fits them well.

So maybe I just want there to be a special word for a sexist who would give you the shirt off his back, but still has backwards views about women.

BTW: When white people in DU make racist comments, they get REALLY upset at being called racist. They don't hate black people. They just don't realize that their comments reiterate that there is no equality.

Am I excusing them or explaining them? Maybe. After all, many of them would give us the shirts off their backs. As long as we don't accuse them of racism. My thought is that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Go for education, not name calling.

Grabbing anyone's sexual parts without consent is sexual assault, no qualifications.

If/when such evidence emerges, then it's fair to say he's sexually assaulted someone.

For NOW (despicable as it is) we only know that he fantasizes that he's indeed SO famous, he could walk up to a woman he doesn't even know and ... GHBHP.

Based on current, available proof, calling him 'a rapist' would be akin to calling him 'murderer' because of his 'I could shoot someone' comment.

That said ... you will be coloring ME ... extremely unsurprised ... if/when we come to find out that Trump HAS, in fact, GHBHP in the past.

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot someone and I wouldn't lose one vote"

Deplorables?

His ex-wife accused him of rape and then backed down when Trump threatened to stop sending her money.

Trump has a pending lawsuit for child rape.

Another woman who claims Trump groped her (sexual assault), dropped her lawsuit, but stands by her allegations.

That's just the evidence we know about. If any of it is true, there's undoubtedly more women he has either intimidated or paid off.

If everybody who recordings of emanations from the man's slimiest depths busts 'em out, there's no way he could sue or fire them all. His lawyers would tell him the damage was done and that retaliation would be a waste of time.