Two More Women Accuse Neil deGrasse Tyson of Sexual Misconduct

It should be looked into and investigation should be done to ascertain the truth.

That said, we are comparing NDT for having wine and cheese, and touching a woman at a party to BK's attempted rape and waving his **** in a girls face????

The right has gone nutso and have no sense of reality.

 

This is the lie of the century. A full investigation was not conducted. Key witnesses were never interviewed and the President limited the investigation - and Republicans rammed his nomination through so due process could be skipped.

There was much evidence that was simply ignored. So please, just stop lying.

 

sorry, is NDT being nominated for the supreme court or did i miss something? if he did something wrong it should be investigated fully and he should deal with the repercussions. you know, the same process that should have been in place with justice kavanaugh instead of the expedited dog and pony show that occurred.

the fact that you view the world in such black and white exemplifies perfectly your mental incapacity to comprehend many of today's issues... but it sure as hell doesn't stop you from opining on them. america!

 

Except this is not true. Dems wanted due process with BK but Republicans did not.

 

No, I don't think that's the problem. I think the objection to "believe women" is similar to the objection to "black lives matter." Either willfully or due to tone deafness, conservatives hear those as attacks on the rights of men and of white people, respectively. I hear it as a defense against the attacks on women and on black people, respectively.

In the case of BLM, the implication of that term is that heretofore the lives of black people have been undervalued and its a call to value those lives equally to those of white people. So when the retort comes that all lives matter, it is essentially saying the status quo was fine. That for black lives to matter more, they'd have to take that value from white people or from police, and we won't be having that. So conservatives thinking they're being fair in insisting that all lives matter are only communicating to black people that they will get no more due than they do now.

I think it's the same with 'believe women.' Conservatives seem to hear it to mean that due process should be abrogated and we should go directly from the accusation to the guillotine. I don't hear it that way, and I don't think it is meant that way. What we have seen historically and in society today is that people have been very good at rationalizing reasons a woman's testimony can be discounted. She says this happened but maybe she's exaggerating, maybe she's mistaken, maybe she was too drunk to know, maybe she wanted it at the time and later regretted it, maybe she's vengeful, maybe she's looking for fame or money, maybe she gave the wrong signals, maybe it was all just a misunderstanding, on and on. Which is not to say that it's never the case. But we are so good at succumbing to doubt -- especially given that oftentimes these are acts with no other witnesses and no physical evidence -- that we end up discounting too much the testimony of women. 'Believe women' is a call and a reminder that the testimony of a victim is still testimony and to be wary of not falling into the habitual patterns of rationalizing your disbelief. That does not mean we chuck due process out the window. It does not mean you have to convict based on one person's testimony. It means, like you'd said, taking the women seriously. Because we have not been taking them seriously enough.

 

Seems to be some confusion over the due process you get from the Constitution, and a fair process to evaluate accusations when you're applying for a job. They aren't the same thing.

 

What crime was Kavanaugh charged with? You have belched a long diatribe based on something that never happened.

 

I've been trying to figure out what the logic behind this argument has been for a while

Are you arguing that due process is simply a legal concept, that has no basis in principles? or are you suggesting that there's the PR side of a job application that an employer might have?

The first would make sense to people without principles, the latter might have been viable until the senate results, as that PR was pretty clearly an own goal.

 

Well what is the context of the situation.......? The court of public opinion? The court of law? A Supreme Court nomination hearing? A job interview?

 

I think this me too movement or whatever you want to call it .... is a serious issue . But it's one that needs to be discussed outside the realm of politics ; too much emotion flares up and instead of a discussion we get into a partisan argument .

Objectively , kavanaugh's accusation deserved more of a spotlight . But politics ramped up the spectacle and news networks had to report on it or lose viewership .

And as much as society needs to listen diligently to accusers , they also need to keep an open mind about the accused . Even if a crime was commited , the fact that it happened far in the past needs to be factored into any punishment . People can and do change . Some people stay the same too .

As a dude who is completely non-aggressive and generally timid around women that I think are attractive .... I'm viewing this from my own perspective . It's hard to believe what some men do ... and I know that there is evidence that some men do take sexual liberties .... but personally I feel that they are in the very small minority .

 

I used to believe this as well because I personally have never seen a lot of it in the work place. However, in speaking to women, particularly those in my own family, it sounds more prevalent than I've been exposed to in person.

 

So folks on the left are being consistent. They wanted to fully investigate Kavanaugh. They also want an investigation into NDT. Despite the finger pointing, there is no double standard. There is no cry to only selectively believe women.

 

Good point . I haven't really broached the subject too much . I mean I've seen drunk dudes at frat parties make out with drunk girls .... but nothing more . I don't consider that egregious.

But I could probably stand to broaden my horizons .

 

Same experience, thought it was just a very small minority. Its an eye opener when you realize that these occurrences are actually very very common. Kinda sad when you think about it.

 

The International Association of Chiefs of Police uses that as the basis for investigating sexual/abuse crimes against women. They start with "she is telling the truth", then they investigate from there. Lunatics, I know.

https://www.theiacp.org/resources/document/sexual-assault-incident-reports-investigative-strategies

This is not a flawless book, but it is a good read that would open your eyes a bit:

 

some discussion of Tyson's response here. the tl;dr summary:

https://ethicsalarms.com/2018/12/05...se-tysons-metoo-accusations-and-his-response/

 

more from Buzzfeed

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/articl...-degrasse-tyson-sexual-allegations-four-women

long article, much more at the link