Redskins Cheerleader-Gate

[jrry32]

That is what is in dispute. If true, we all think it's bad. If this is a lawyer-works up an outrage over something to score a settlement over an obvious deep pocket target- equally scummy. Equally taking advantage of the girl. Agree? Let's see which one is true.

What cause of action will the lawyer assert?

 

[OldSchool]

That is what is in dispute. If true, we all think it's bad. If this is a lawyer-works up an outrage over something to score a settlement over an obvious deep pocket target- equally scummy. Equally taking advantage of the girl. Agree? Let's see which one is true.

And with the facts unkown I fail to see how this is a laughing matter that some seem to have made it into.

 

[Farr Be It]

What cause of action will the lawyer assert?

I don't think like a lawyer. The world is their oyster. The representative for the New Orleans cheerleader found a cause of action. So you don't think this could be actionable?

 

[Mackeyser]

I think some folks need to read the #whyIstayed stories to understand even a little bit about cases of abuse, sexual harassment, sexual assault, etc

Moreover, as I tell my youngest son all the time... just because one doesn't understand something, doesn't mean that changes anything. It just means one doesn't understand. It most certainly doesn't infer that the subject possesses any less merit because of the lack of understanding.

I don't think it's been made into a laughing matter or circus at all.

I think we're at a time when gross behavior like what we already know about isn't and shouldn't be tolerated.

And I'm just going by what we know. If everything is true, it's obviously much worse.

 

[jrry32]

I don't think like a lawyer. The world is their oyster. The representative for the New Orleans cheerleader found a cause of action. So you don't think this could be actionable?

The NO cheerleader filed a complaint with the EEOC before the statute of limitations expired. The Washington cheerleaders did not. They can't sue under Title VII or the VHRA for sexual harassment (gender discrimination) because the statute of limitations bars the suit. Ergo, I don't see a path for a successful lawsuit.

 

[Farr Be It]

The NO cheerleader filed a complaint with the EEOC before the statute of limitations expired. The Washington cheerleaders did not. They can't sue under Title VII or the VHRA for sexual harassment (gender discrimination) because the statute of limitations bars the suit. Ergo, I don't see a path for a successful lawsuit.

Interesting. Thanks Jerry.

Some guys seem to be thinking I am defending Cad-like behavior because I am taking a wait and see approach to this. Laughable. I hope you see that.

As I said. I think most of us want the same thing here. Justice and truth.

 

[bluecoconuts]

So HUGE difference between the oglers on the adult resort in Costa Rica and the “exclusive nude art show” in the hotel. Gotcha. They were both boner shows. Please. The naked human body IS sexual. That is why we wear clothes.

Not attacking you Blue. But I don’t see a dimes bit of difference. Each of these girls signs up to be ogled. Period. And in the Redskin case, the second shoe is dropping. Some girls are reporting the team did not, in fact threaten or force girls to do anything wrong here.

I don’t know all the facts. Neither does anyone on this board. But we should probably pump the breaks on the moralizing until we know. Let justice do it’s thing.

Most of the people at the show were gay, trust me, nobody was oogling or getting turned on by the girl with a giant nose on her head, or the three girls that made up a mustache. It wasn't that type of crowd.

If you don't see any difference between sexual nudity and nonsexual nudity, then I don't know what to say. Is surgery sexual to you? I can promise you when I was shot in my groin the female nurses surrounding me, naked from the waste down, there was no sexual tension.

If you want to excuse it, or say the girls somehow deserved it or whatever "they knew what they signed up for" means (because I don't know) then you do you man. I ain't about that life.

 

[jrry32]

Interesting. Thanks Jerry.

Some guys seem to be thinking I am defending Cad-like behavior because I am taking a wait and see approach to this. Laughable. I hope you see that.

As I said. I think most of us want the same thing here. Justice and truth.

My issue here is that the default based on all of the evidence we have should be to believe the women absent evidence contradicting their accounts. The Redskins didn't deny those things happen. The cheerleaders who supported the Redskins did not deny those things happened. The cheerleaders who supported the Redskins only said they felt like they could say no. That means they implicitly confirmed that those things happened. At this point, there's no doubt it happened. The question is if the women who originally outed the story felt like they could say no to going topless or escorting the guys to the club. They said they did not feel they could say no. Why not take them at their word?

 

[Farr Be It]

If you don't see any difference between sexual nudity and nonsexual nudity, then I don't know what to say. Is surgery sexual to you? I can promise you when I was shot in my groin the female nurses surrounding me, naked from the waste down, there was no sexual tension.

If you want to excuse it, or say the girls somehow deserved it or whatever "they knew what they signed up for" then you do you man. I ain't about that life.

seriously, Blue? You always take my comment to the next level, and conflate what I am saying. I'm sure the gynecologist can focus.

Yeah. I'll "do me". and no I don't see all nudity as sexual, but Come on. In public, like that. Please. That was part of the deal. You know I have not excused anything. So don't infer I have.

Sorry about your groin shot. Sounds like it all worked out.

 

[Karate61]

That's on you.....I'd not only tell....I'd do something about it...

You know, people are different. Some people like steak, some don't. Some people are tall and some are short. Maybe you'd tell, and maybe you'd do something about it. But, not everyone is lucky enough to be strong like you. Strong people like you and I should look out (and help if possible) others that can't. It's very unfair to expect that everyone that's abused should have no feelings and immediately alert the press. What if a teenager is being molested by a parent? Who's that kid supposed to go tell?

 

[LesBaker]

So HUGE difference between the oglers on the adult resort in Costa Rica and the “exclusive nude art show” in the hotel. Gotcha. They were both boner shows. Please. The naked human body IS sexual. That is why we wear clothes.

Not attacking you Blue. But I don’t see a dimes bit of difference. Each of these girls signs up to be ogled. Period. And in the Redskin case, the second shoe is dropping. Some girls are reporting the team did not, in fact threaten or force girls to do anything wrong here.

I don’t know all the facts. Neither does anyone on this board. But we should probably pump the breaks on the moralizing until we know. Let justice do it’s thing.

Pretty dim view......but Oooookkaaayyyy.

What cause of action will the lawyer assert?

Perversion........ohwaitnonevermind

seriously, Blue? You always take my comment to the next level, and conflate what I am saying. I'm sure the gynecologist can focus.

Yeah. I'll "do me". and no I don't see all nudity as sexual, but Come on. In public, like that. Please. That was part of the deal. You know I have not excused anything. So don't infer I have.

Sorry about your groin shot. Sounds like it all worked out.

Narrow mind..........grab yourself by your pussy.

 

[Angry Ram]

They didn't escort corporate logos to dinner.

They escorted men...who'd watched them at the photo shoot...and picked them specifically.

Thus it doesn't make any difference if it's fans or corporate sponsors. It doesn't make it any less gross because the dudes are corporate douchebags rather than random douchebags.

That has a total whorehouse feel to it. "Walk the line and pick yer filly!"

Point was it was a joke. Corporate men in suits make paint drying look like a competitive sport.

Anyway, I think this was a Redskins event with cheerleaders involvement (something that all teams with cheerleaders do), turned into a social justice issue. Agree or disagree, that's what I'm sticking with until facts of actual sexual abuse or crimes comes out (if any).

 

[Farr Be It]

Pretty dim view......but Oooookkaaayyyy.

Perversion........ohwaitnonevermind
Narrow mind..........grab yourself by your wuss.

Look keyboard warrior. I don't know WTF you read that sent you into a tizzy, but you better not get personal with me, boy. My mind is awesome. and my views are sound.

Take you're @bluecoconuts man-crush, and move on. He and I can work out our converstion without you getting personal with me. That is not what this board is about. That is twice now. STFU

 

[jrry32]

Point was it was a joke. Corporate men in suits make paint drying look like a competitive sport.

Anyway, I think this was a Redskins event with cheerleaders involvement (something that all teams with cheerleaders do), turned into a social justice issue. Agree or disagree, that's what I'm sticking with until facts of actual sexual abuse or crimes comes out (if any).

If not treating your female employees like escorts against their wishes is a social justice issue, consider me a social justice warrior. I would hope you'd consider yourself the same.

 

[bluecoconuts]

seriously, Blue? You always take my comment to the next level, and conflate what I am saying. I'm sure the gynecologist can focus.

Yeah. I'll "do me". and no I don't see all nudity as sexual, but Come on. In public, like that. Please. That was part of the deal. You know I have not excused anything. So don't infer I have.

Sorry about your groin shot. Sounds like it all worked out.

I told you what the event was and you keep trying to say it's something it wasn't. I don't know what you want, if you can't accept that it wasn't sexual then I can't help you.

And when you say things like they knew what they were getting into, thats excusing the behavior.

 

[wolfdogg]

I blame our society. Seriously. I've heard that God doesn't make mistakes, well, except that foreskin fiasco that a lot of people cut off immediately. Maybe God should've created man on the fifth day when he wasn't getting fatigued.

Anyway, there are many large tribes and even larger so called modern societies where topless women running about are a natural part of daily life or not that big of a deal.

And you know what, virtually all of these tribes have a zero occurance of rape. They dont even know what the word means. And we call ourselves the advanced society.

I'm not saying we should live our daily lives in Speedos. Oh, God no. Actually, now that I picture that in my head, we may have to gradually move into this, but can't we just ease up on, I'd say outdated notions but at this point its really medieval, that we have about nudity.

Once we all got over the big freak out of the deal, we'd actually become a better society and this country would be a better place to live.

 

[Farr Be It]

I told you what the event was and you keep trying to say it's something it wasn't. I don't know what you want, if you can't accept that it wasn't sexual then I can't help you.

And when you say things like they knew what they were getting into, thats excusing the behavior.

Fair enough on the event. I never said, "they knew what they were getting into". But I can see how you might infer it.

Anyway, I DM'd you. Sorry about being so rigid on the event you were at.

 

[VegasRam]

Nope. I think there's a huge difference in making a choice freely and being pressured into something you aren't comfortable doing by an employer.

Problem is my friend, you don’t know they were pressured.

You just assume they were, or it happened at all, or....

SJW on the march again, and honestly, it’s getting old.

Check out the “Oxbow Incident” sometime.
Might learn something.

 

[jrry32]

Problem is my friend, you don’t know they were pressured.

You just assume they were, or it happened at all, or....

SJW on the march again, and honestly, it’s getting old.

Check out the “Oxbow Incident” sometime.
Might learn something.

That's what they are telling us happened. I believe women when they tell me what they felt internally. That's my default until proven otherwise. Maybe you don't. That's your choice.

And I don't need to assume that it happened at all. That has already been confirmed.

 

[Farr Be It]

That's what they are telling us happened. I believe women when they tell me what they felt internally. That's my default until proven otherwise. Maybe you don't. That's your choice.

And I don't need to assume that it happened at all. That has already been confirmed.

I believe MY women, when they tell me something. Who is this chick??? Anybody know, Jerry? I appreciate your sensitivity. But here's the point: There are scumbags with both sets of plumbing. Why do we believe an accuser, just because she is a woman? This is where the PC police thing comes into play. Not talking about THIS case.

And I know it is difficult to come forward. I know women are reluctant. They need to feel safe to come forward if something bad happens.

But if some woman accused my friend @jrry32 of touching her inappropriately, should "I believe women"?

I would assume my friend's innocence, until proven guilty. As a matter of fact, getting to know your character a little bit, I would have confidence that you didn't do it.

If my buddy @bluecoconuts was accused of inappropriate relations with a student, (a bad grade can sometime cause vengeful actions?) should "I believe women"? Or maybe, consider the character of Blue, and that he is professional, and would not do such a thing? (I just use that example because he teaches, and is in this conversation.)

Dude, women DO NOT have the market on truth or integrity. Having said that, I want the maximum protection of women in our society. I want women to be held up on a pedestal of respect.

But each case is different, Jerry. Denigrating an innocent man is not more virtuous than defending a devious woman. And waiting on the facts does not make me a misogynist.