Page 4 of 5

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:35 pm
by Frank N Stein
fooloso4 wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:04 pm
Apparently he claims to be disgusted and feels he was abused. It's not really about what you consider to be inappropriate is it? I believe sex with a 17 year old used to be called 'statutory rape' in the United States (where you are from?). Perhaps it still is.
I'm surprised at such double standards on a philosophy forum.
[/quote]

You said:
She is a leader in the #MeToo movement and has been accused of having inappropriate sexual relations with a 17 year old when she was 37.
This opens the question of what inappropriate sexual relations are. One way to address this is by appeal to the law, but this is not a legal forum, it is a philosophy forum. A discussion of the various issues of inappropriate sexual relations including what we consider to be inappropriate is what it is really about.

In the U.S. the age of consent differs from state to state - from 16 to 18.


What double standard?
[/quote]

Is 'inappropriate' a legal term? If so, then what does it mean in a legal sense? My opinion is that it's far worse for a teacher to have sex with a pupil ('consensual' or not) or some other authority figure (eg. a psychiatrist and their patient), with a vulnerable person (the young often get crushes on authority figures, much older people etc.) and it's up to the 'more mature' person to not take advantage and act on it, than some inept 'passmaking' on adult women which might or might not include 'inappropriate' touching of that-which-must-never-be-touched, without written permission in triplicate.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:22 pm
by fooloso4
Frank N Stein wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:35 pm


Is 'inappropriate' a legal term? If so, then what does it mean in a legal sense? My opinion is that it's far worse for a teacher to have sex with a pupil ('consensual' or not) or some other authority figure (eg. a psychiatrist and their patient), with a vulnerable person (the young often get crushes on authority figures, much older people etc.) and it's up to the 'more mature' person to not take advantage and act on it, than some inept 'passmaking' on adult women which might or might not include 'inappropriate' touching of that-which-must-never-be-touched, without written permission in triplicate.
First, I see that you have dropped the claim of a double standard. Second, apparently you are no longer talking about Asia Argento. If you are talking about Krauss then at least some of his actions fall under the student/teacher relationship. “Written permission in triplicate” completely misses the mark, an attempt to trivialize what may be a serious offense. A woman should not have to put up and shut up if Krauss wants to grope her. Do you really think he should be allowed to do such a thing? On what grounds? It should be noted that Krauss does not attempt to defend such behavior, he denies it.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:31 pm
by Frank N Stein
fooloso4 wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:22 pm
Frank N Stein wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 9:35 pm


Is 'inappropriate' a legal term? If so, then what does it mean in a legal sense? My opinion is that it's far worse for a teacher to have sex with a pupil ('consensual' or not) or some other authority figure (eg. a psychiatrist and their patient), with a vulnerable person (the young often get crushes on authority figures, much older people etc.) and it's up to the 'more mature' person to not take advantage and act on it, than some inept 'passmaking' on adult women which might or might not include 'inappropriate' touching of that-which-must-never-be-touched, without written permission in triplicate.
First, I see that you have dropped the claim of a double standard. Second, apparently you are no longer talking about Asia Argento. If you are talking about Krauss then at least some of his actions fall under the student/teacher relationship. “Written permission in triplicate” completely misses the mark, an attempt to trivialize what may be a serious offense. A woman should not have to put up and shut up if Krauss wants to grope her. Do you really think he should be allowed to do such a thing? On what grounds? It should be noted that Krauss does not attempt to defend such behavior, he denies it.
If you want to talk 'legal' then yes, he was 'allowed'. I think what we are talking about here is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy on the part of Asia Argento.
You are abusing the term 'teacher student' which implies a teacher and a vulnerable child, or very young adult. Universities are not the same environment as a school system. University students are assumed to be adults and to act like adults. Lecturers are simply there to lecture, not impose authority and tell students how to behave.
Humans are sexual creatures. Wherever you get humans you are going to get every kind of sexual behaviour you can think of. Men are going to make passes at women--some inept, some unwanted, some not--and vice versa. What's good for the goose...... Many women are very 'tactile' too--sitting on men's laps (often in front of their wives), touching their arms, thighs..... There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless you want to live in an oppressive, Victorian world of hypocrisy and fear.
Americans have always been known as unsophisticated hypocritical puritans so it's no surprise that 'me too' started in the US.

Apparently this is what young women are supposed to aspire to (but show a nipple and all hell breaks loose).

Image

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:09 am
by fooloso4
Frank N Stein wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:31 pm


If you want to talk 'legal' then yes, he was 'allowed'. I think what we are talking about here is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy on the part of Asia Argento.
You are abusing the term 'teacher student' which implies a teacher and a vulnerable child, or very young adult. Universities are not the same environment as a school system. University students are assumed to be adults and to act like adults. Lecturers are simply there to lecture, not impose authority and tell students how to behave.
Humans are sexual creatures. Wherever you get humans you are going to get every kind of sexual behaviour you can think of. Men are going to make passes at women--some inept, some unwanted, some not--and vice versa. What's good for the goose...... Many women are very 'tactile' too--sitting on men's laps (often in front of their wives), touching their arms, thighs..... There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless you want to live in an oppressive, Victorian world of hypocrisy and fear.
Americans have always been known as unsophisticated hypocritical puritans so it's no surprise that 'me too' started in the US.

Apparently this is what young women are supposed to aspire to (but show a nipple and all hell breaks loose).

Image
If you want to talk 'legal' then yes, he was 'allowed'.
Probably not: https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/ ... punishment

In addition, if it is workplace related, as it was in many of the complaints against Krauss then in addition to the legal question there is the question of an institutions code of ethics. An institution that does nothing in response to credible allegations is legally liable for having a hostile work environment.

Moral and ethical issues are not limited to legal offenses. Such behavior is a violation of social norms.
I think what we are talking about here is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy on the part of Asia Argento.
You introduced her in a topic talking about Lawrence Krauss. Even if she is a hypocrite that does not invalidate the claims against Weinstein or Krauss or anyone else.
You are abusing the term 'teacher student' which implies a teacher and a vulnerable child, or very young adult.
Students are not defined by age. The University of Arizona’s policy does not define a student by age but by relationship to the university, including relationships to teachers. A graduate student is still a student and vulnerable because their future may be in the hands of a teacher or adviser.
Lecturers are simply there to lecture, not impose authority and tell students how to behave.
That’s funny because it is the "lecturer’s” behavior that is in violation with the university’s policies. Krauss was not just a lecturer, he was a thesis adviser and director of the university’s Origin Project. He was in a position of power and could make or break a graduate student’s career.
Humans are sexual creatures.
Look, you might not object to Krauss groping you, you might even enjoy it, but that does not mean he is free to grope whoever he wants.
What's good for the goose......
Really?! The fact that some women are physical does not mean that you are free to grope every woman you see. Does this really need to be explained to you? Do you ever go out in public? Do you have a job where you come in contact with other people?
Americans have always been known as unsophisticated hypocritical puritans so it's no surprise that 'me too' started in the US.
You can congratulate yourself on being so sophisticated, but one’s attitudes toward sex and being groped are two different things. If someone does not want to be groped by you then keep your hands off. It is really that simple.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:18 am
by Frank N Stein
fooloso4 wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:09 am
Frank N Stein wrote:
Fri Jan 04, 2019 10:31 pm


If you want to talk 'legal' then yes, he was 'allowed'. I think what we are talking about here is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy on the part of Asia Argento.
You are abusing the term 'teacher student' which implies a teacher and a vulnerable child, or very young adult. Universities are not the same environment as a school system. University students are assumed to be adults and to act like adults. Lecturers are simply there to lecture, not impose authority and tell students how to behave.
Humans are sexual creatures. Wherever you get humans you are going to get every kind of sexual behaviour you can think of. Men are going to make passes at women--some inept, some unwanted, some not--and vice versa. What's good for the goose...... Many women are very 'tactile' too--sitting on men's laps (often in front of their wives), touching their arms, thighs..... There's nothing anyone can do about it, unless you want to live in an oppressive, Victorian world of hypocrisy and fear.
Americans have always been known as unsophisticated hypocritical puritans so it's no surprise that 'me too' started in the US.

Apparently this is what young women are supposed to aspire to (but show a nipple and all hell breaks loose).

Image
If you want to talk 'legal' then yes, he was 'allowed'.
Probably not: https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/ ... punishment

In addition, if it is workplace related, as it was in many of the complaints against Krauss then in addition to the legal question there is the question of an institutions code of ethics. An institution that does nothing in response to credible allegations is legally liable for having a hostile work environment.

Moral and ethical issues are not limited to legal offenses. Such behavior is a violation of social norms.
I think what we are talking about here is hypocrisy. Hypocrisy on the part of Asia Argento.
You introduced her in a topic talking about Lawrence Krauss. Even if she is a hypocrite that does not invalidate the claims against Weinstein or Krauss or anyone else.
You are abusing the term 'teacher student' which implies a teacher and a vulnerable child, or very young adult.
Students are not defined by age. The University of Arizona’s policy does not define a student by age but by relationship to the university, including relationships to teachers. A graduate student is still a student and vulnerable because their future may be in the hands of a teacher or adviser.
Lecturers are simply there to lecture, not impose authority and tell students how to behave.
That’s funny because it is the "lecturer’s” behavior that is in violation with the university’s policies. Krauss was not just a lecturer, he was a thesis adviser and director of the university’s Origin Project. He was in a position of power and could make or break a graduate student’s career.
Humans are sexual creatures.
Look, you might not object to Krauss groping you, you might even enjoy it, but that does not mean he is free to grope whoever he wants.
What's good for the goose......
Really?! The fact that some women are physical does not mean that you are free to grope every woman you see. Does this really need to be explained to you? Do you ever go out in public? Do you have a job where you come in contact with other people?
Americans have always been known as unsophisticated hypocritical puritans so it's no surprise that 'me too' started in the US.
You can congratulate yourself on being so sophisticated, but one’s attitudes toward sex and being groped are two different things. If someone does not want to be groped by you then keep your hands off. It is really that simple.
Indeed. If someone tries to grope me and I don't want them to, I tell them. I'm all growed up :D
As you don't seem to be capable of grasping even the simplest points, then there is really no point in continuing with this discussion.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:21 am
by Gary Childress
fooloso4, I haven't seen a video of any of Krauss' actions, however, putting hands on thighs is certainly questionable territory (though not fatal or involving bloodshed). I'm curious, though. What is your reaction to this video of Ariana Grande having a priest put an arm around her? Do you think this is sexual misconduct? There was a LOT of hubbub over it among some of the local PC crowd here in Orlando, Florida, which I thought was absolutely ridiculous. I even got publicly shamed on FaceBook by a bunch of idiots (young millennial university students) who were calling me a "misogynist" because I didn't think it was a big deal. I can't even show my face in certain "open mic" poetry events around town now because prominent members of the crowd there think the priest sexually "molested" her and I'm a terrible person for questioning their beliefs on the severity of it.

I'd like to get your take on the incident since we are discussing "PC" and "Metoo." Here's a video of the horrific moment when Ms. Grande had a man's arm around her on stage.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkadKUQe6fM

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:25 am
by fooloso4
Indeed. If someone tries to grope me and I don't want them to, I tell them. I'm all growed up
This may be the closest you get to sex with another person but how you might act is irrelevant to the question of whether this type of behavior should be condoned.

If you are all growed up as you imagine yourself to be then you would know that you should not go around groping people. If you did that in a professional setting on a repeated basis over a ten year period as Krauss did you would be fired when it finally came to light. Most of the women never said anything until they found out that they were not the only one.

If you are as sophisticated as you imagine yourself to be you would know that there are signs that someone is interested or not. The default setting should not be grope and hope that they do not fight you off.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:35 am
by fooloso4
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:21 am
What is your reaction to this video of Ariana Grande having a priest put an arm around her? Do you think this is sexual misconduct?
It looked innocent enough until the end where it got into questionable territory. It may have just been the way she is built and it may have looked different from a different angle. I would not accuse him of sexual misconduct based on the video clip. Has she complained?

I don't see the relevance to the topic of Krauss' behavior though.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:41 am
by Gary Childress
fooloso4 wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:35 am
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:21 am
What is your reaction to this video of Ariana Grande having a priest put an arm around her? Do you think this is sexual misconduct?
It looked innocent enough until the end where it got into questionable territory. It may have just been the way she is built and it may have looked different from a different angle. I would not accuse him of sexual misconduct based on the video clip. Has she complained?
I'm not aware of Grande making a fuss over it initially but the moment seemed to rock the entertainment world for a few weeks with articles all over the place connecting it with "patriarchy", "domination" and the "#metoo" movement.

Here are some Google results if you need them: https://www.google.com/search?ei=rA0wXO ... IadzEshwao

What happened in the end which you think was questionable territory? Was it some kind of act of assault? People can't hug others anymore.

The priest even apologized afterward and there were still people giving him a hard time about it.
I don't see the relevance to the topic of Krauss' behavior though.
I explained in my post, but I'll repeat (since there is apparently the need to); I was curious what you think of the incident since the topics of #metoo and PC have been brought up in this thread.

That priest paid pretty dearly for that hug and I paid pretty dearly for questioning the severity of peoples responses to it to a bunch of contemporary college kids who were all trigger happy over it. (Basically the issue started with me asking the question to someone who linked the priest's actions to "sexual assault". I responded with "is that really sexual assault, though." The response was for a whole group to pile on and accuse me of "misogyny" for raising what was apparently an uncomfortable question.)

When I was growing up some people were talking about how great the "sexual revolution" was and how awful sexual prudishness was in Victorian England. Now I see careers ruined over sexual improprieties which some go into an absolute FRENZY over. Contrast that with what happens to politicians who engage us in unjust foreign wars and other--much more--destructive and harmful activities (very little in comparison) and it seems pretty surreal in some ways.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:25 am
by Frank N Stein
fooloso4 wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:25 am
Indeed. If someone tries to grope me and I don't want them to, I tell them. I'm all growed up
This may be the closest you get to sex with another person but how you might act is irrelevant to the question of whether this type of behavior should be condoned.

If you are all growed up as you imagine yourself to be then you would know that you should not go around groping people. If you did that in a professional setting on a repeated basis over a ten year period as Krauss did you would be fired when it finally came to light. Most of the women never said anything until they found out that they were not the only one.

If you are as sophisticated as you imagine yourself to be you would know that there are signs that someone is interested or not. The default setting should not be grope and hope that they do not fight you off.
ROFLMAO. Showing your true colours now. It didn't take long. I would blow you a kiss but I don't know how to in this format.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:26 am
by Frank N Stein
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:41 am
fooloso4 wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 2:35 am
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 1:21 am
What is your reaction to this video of Ariana Grande having a priest put an arm around her? Do you think this is sexual misconduct?
It looked innocent enough until the end where it got into questionable territory. It may have just been the way she is built and it may have looked different from a different angle. I would not accuse him of sexual misconduct based on the video clip. Has she complained?
I'm not aware of Grande making a fuss over it initially but the moment seemed to rock the entertainment world for a few weeks with articles all over the place connecting it with "patriarchy", "domination" and the "#metoo" movement.

Here are some Google results if you need them: https://www.google.com/search?ei=rA0wXO ... IadzEshwao

What happened in the end which you think was questionable territory? Was it some kind of act of assault? People can't hug others anymore.

The priest even apologized afterward and there were still people giving him a hard time about it.
I don't see the relevance to the topic of Krauss' behavior though.
I explained in my post, but I'll repeat (since there is apparently the need to); I was curious what you think of the incident since the topics of #metoo and PC have been brought up in this thread.

That priest paid pretty dearly for that hug and I paid pretty dearly for questioning the severity of peoples responses to it to a bunch of contemporary college kids who were all trigger happy over it. (Basically the issue started with me asking the question to someone who linked the priest's actions to "sexual assault". I responded with "is that really sexual assault, though." The response was for a whole group to pile on and accuse me of "misogyny" for raising what was apparently an uncomfortable question.)

When I was growing up some people were talking about how great the "sexual revolution" was and how awful sexual prudishness was in Victorian England. Now I see careers ruined over sexual improprieties which some go into an absolute FRENZY over. Contrast that with what happens to politicians who engage us in unjust foreign wars and other--much more--destructive and harmful activities (very little in comparison) and it seems pretty surreal in some ways.
I like you Gary Childress. You have a functioning bs radar.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:46 am
by fooloso4
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:41 am

Now I see careers ruined over sexual improprieties which some go into an absolute FRENZY over.

Yes, there is some overreaction but there is in response there are some who irrationality assume that all allegations must be false, that it is nothing more than mass hysteria. It think it is reasonable to assume the some allegations are true, some are in a grey area, and some are false. As I have said since the beginning of this thread each case should be examined on its own merits.

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:07 am
by Frank N Stein
fooloso4 wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 4:46 am
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:41 am

Now I see careers ruined over sexual improprieties which some go into an absolute FRENZY over.

Yes, there is some overreaction but there is in response there are some who irrationality assume that all allegations must be false, that it is nothing more than mass hysteria. It think it is reasonable to assume the some allegations are true, some are in a grey area, and some are false. As I have said since the beginning of this thread each case should be examined on its own merits.
Which allegations do you think are true, which are false, and what do you think the punishment should be for the ones that you think are true? How have you come to your conclusions?

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:03 am
by Gary Childress
https://www.chronicle.com/article/3-Rev ... the/244887

Judging from this article, the most serious thing I see here is the groping. The other stuff (others witnessing him and a colleague apparently kissing consensually and "sexual comments") doesn't seem all that serious to me. The groping seems to be two incidents (a hand on a breast in one and a hand on an inner thigh in the other), and it's difficult to tell but they both appear to have happened at after lecture "receptions" (a.k.a parties). So I'm not sure if "workplace harassment" applies or not.

I mean, all they need to do now is send investigative reporters to infiltrate and stake out Club Med and they could probably bag every prominent human being in the World (females probably included) for something which someone out there thinks ought not be done between two human beings and their bodies. Heck, the reporters themselves would probably get busted in the process...

Re: Lawrence Krauss

Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:38 am
by Frank N Stein
Gary Childress wrote:
Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:03 am
https://www.chronicle.com/article/3-Rev ... the/244887

Judging from this article, the most serious thing I see here is the groping. The other stuff (others witnessing him and a colleague apparently kissing consensually and "sexual comments") doesn't seem all that serious to me. The groping seems to be two incidents (a hand on a breast in one and a hand on an inner thigh in the other), and it's difficult to tell but they both appear to have happened at after lecture "receptions" (a.k.a parties). So I'm not sure if "workplace harassment" applies or not.

I mean, all they need to do now is send investigative reporters to infiltrate and stake out Club Med and they could probably bag every prominent human being in the World (females probably included) for something which someone out there thinks ought not be done between two human beings and their bodies. Heck, the reporters themselves would probably get busted in the process...
They appear to be mixing up 'incidents'. The 'galaxy' (actually the Solar System) was on a woman's arm, and the alleged perpetrator was Neil de Grasse Tyson. So much for 'quality journalism'. The 'thigh' incident was Lawrence Krauss, with no galaxy in attendance (or was there?). A solar system on an arm, and a galaxy on a dress? No wonder these men are completely losing control of themselves :roll: