Welcome to DU!
    The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
    Join the community:
    Create a free account
    Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
    Become a Star Member
    Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
    All Forums
        Issue Forums
        Culture Forums
        Alliance Forums
        Region Forums
        Support Forums
        Help & Search
    
History of Feminism
In reply to the discussion: Victim Shaming on behalf of Julian Assange [View all]seabeyond
(110,159 posts)11. and that should be easy.  it doesnt conflict.  that would be the difference of judging and not.
        people here think calling out the bad is judging.  it is not.  it is simply recognizing and calling it out loud for what it is.  and yes.  there will be good to find.  though....  i really do not know what it is with assange.  that is my personal belief.
interesting.  thanks.  edward is a good one to look at the issue.  i would have voted for him, with trepidation, before.... i knew what he did.  and for different reasons, other decide is the obvious one.  weinrer.  a lot i like.  and respect.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
  Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
						
							84 replies
							
								
 = new reply since forum marked as read
							
						
      
      
					
						Highlight:
						NoneDon't highlight anything
						5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
						RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
					
                    
					
                    
        
        egomaniac and weasel are the two descriptive i put on the guy also.  wowser, lol. nt
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #19
      
        
        this is why using "women against rape" with this article is garbage.  everyone knows the sweden
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #65
      
        
        ah.  so when a woman says no (because no condom) and a man holds her down, that is acceptable
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #52
      
        
        Supposed Rajputs = good. Supposed victim = bad. No day in court cause the net says so.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #54
      
        
        you seem to throw up the no one knows when convenient, yet deny the women the right to take to court
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #66
      
        
        Wow. You have a lot of nerve to come into this space and diss one of our most
        Sheldon Cooper
        Dec 2013
        #55
      
        
        Maybe you should read up on some things before you come in here running your mouth.
        Sheldon Cooper
        Dec 2013
        #62
      
        
        "I question your sudden concern for the so called victims".  that would be a personal attack.  and
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #67
      
        
        he is pure egomaniac.  i did nto think much of him and manning prior to rape charges.  but, since...
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #3
      
        
        both, what?  i believe it is a big old scam.  he isnt wanted.  he is not gonna be got by u.s.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #6
      
        
        i knew most of that shit before wiki came out.  and if i knew most of the stuff, bet it pretty much
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #25
      
        
        and that should be easy.  it doesnt conflict.  that would be the difference of judging and not.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #11
      
        
        and also some insist if you want to see Assange answer for the sexual assault
        BainsBane
        Dec 2013
        #16
      
        
        For certain people, Assange is the star quarterback of their favorite football team nt
        geek tragedy
        Dec 2013
        #10
      
        
        perfectly said.  i posted elsewhere.  it reminds me of the 67k people that cheered a possible rapist
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #13
      
        
        i re read that post.  du has pretty much set itself up with jury so women canNOT even argue sexism,
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #36
      
        
        and look how close.  one more.  i am shut up.  how many posts do i get alerted on a day....
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #48
      
        
        i have 6 hides.  because someone presents the offensive.  i challenge the offensive.  how does one
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #42
      
        
        And, not to put too fine a point on it, I present substantively the same arguments
        Recursion
        Dec 2013
        #43
      
        
        women are dropping like flies.  this has become an hostile environment for the women that speak out.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #45
      
        
        Right, it must've been sexism for a jury to hide "fuck you, darlin' nt" and "fuck you. and i will
        Electric Monk
        Dec 2013
        #61
      
        
        i was pointing out the poster said screw off.  screw off = fuck you.  so no, that was not
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #68
      
        
        the lie is saying.  screw off = fuck you, is saying fuck you, to you.  as the alerter did.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #73
      
        
        who reads what you write.  look at this post.  it is so full of trash talk why would i bother.
        seabeyond
        Dec 2013
        #75