Yes. In my mind it would. But Lewinski wasn't an unwilling participant.

 

Doesn't matter when one is in a position of power over another.

 

Doesn't matter when one is in a position of power over another.

 

I understand that legally that is true. I disagree, though, that this is an issue of her "rights".

I may have to retract what I said. I talked to a friend of mine which has worked all her professional career in human resources and in many companies and in some states of law, a superior having relations with a subordinate COULD be seen as sexual harassment due to the superior being in a power position over the subordinate. I don't agree with this but, no company or government asked for my opinion. So it could be argued that Rand Paul was correct and we were wrong.

 

That's the regulations as I've always been led to believe.

I understand that legally that is true. I disagree, though, that this is an issue of her "rights".

 

That would open a lot of women to unwanted attention that would be uncomfortable for them to ignore so I could see it as a right, for both men and women but mainly women.

Not a women's rights issue, a respect for women issue for Clinton.

 

I liked Clinton and even voted for him once, but that whole issue was an embarrassment to the office and for our country. If some can't see that they need to take off their Blue Glasses and look at it again.

I agree with RM and others who agree with her. It's not like Monica was in HS or something, there was mutual interest in sex. Plus, come on, she could have also come on to him, "hey (insert friends name here) guess who I just had sex with?". You could even tell in the photos and videos when. She was near him in public, she wasn't ashamed of it.

 

Again, this is not a woman's rights issue.

 

And I stated before, if this is such a big deal then why didn't Mitch bring it up? They are unaware what type of reaction this would get, so Paul took up the cause incase it backfires.

While some may not see this as a rights issue, how about respect? Respect for the woman you married? Respect for the woman you are using, knowing that you are using her? I believe to help gain the equality that women seek, one must also respect the people who you say you want to help. Otherwise all you are doing is talking to gain an advantage of some type. For B. Clinton this is a double edged sword, one side political, the other side physical.

While some may not see this as a rights issue' date=' how about respect? Respect for the woman you married? Respect for the woman you are using, knowing that you are using her? I believe to help gain the equality that women seek, one must also respect the people who you say you want to help. Otherwise all you are doing is talking to gain an advantage of some type. For B. Clinton this is a double edged sword, one side political, the other side physical.[/quote']

 

I can completely agree that adultery is a lack of respect. But it's not a woman's rights issue. Adulterers also come in the female form. And frankly, one who allows oneself to be "used" draws little sympathy from me.

 

And while we are on the subject of respect, I abhor the objectification of women (in particular) and men. But, again, they aren't "rights" issues. Trying to cloud the arena by using statements like "respect" and "sexual harassment" ad interchangeable with the definition of women's rights is....well..."inciteful".

I agree with RM and others who agree with her. It's not like Monica was in HS or something, there was mutual interest in sex. Plus, come on, she could have also come on to him, "hey (insert friends name here) guess who I just had sex with?". You could even tell in the photos and videos when. She was near him in public, she wasn't ashamed of it.

 

Again, this is not a woman's rights issue.

 

And I stated before, if this is such a big deal then why didn't Mitch bring it up? They are unaware what type of reaction this would get, so Paul took up the cause incase it backfires.

 

I am simply amazed at the sexist tone of your first paragraph and am surprised that some of our women's rights advocates on here have not called you out on it, but it's what Clinton counted on all his career and his supporters never let him down.

I can completely agree that adultery is a lack of respect. But it's not a woman's rights issue. Adulterers also come in the female form. And frankly, one who allows oneself to be "used" draws little sympathy from me.

 

And while we are on the subject of respect, I abhor the objectification of women (in particular) and men. But, again, they aren't "rights" issues. Trying to cloud the arena by using statements like "respect" and "sexual harassment" ad interchangeable with the definition of women's rights is....well..."inciteful".

 

Doesn't look like our progressives have progressed in twenty years.

You can't claim you respect womens right without respecting women first. It's a very simple concept. That doesn't even dive into the fact Clinton's actions would of denied him access for security clearence in many non-elected government positions because his multiple affairs left him vulnerable to blackmail. In any background check when trying to get higher security clearence on of the first questions they ask and one of the first things they investigate is your infidelity. If your wife can't trust then how can your country with top secrets.

I am simply amazed at the sexist tone of your first paragraph and am surprised that some of our women's rights advocates on here have not called you out on it' date=' but it's what Clinton counted on all his career and his supporters never let him down.[/quote']

 

Lol, how was I "sexist"? Maybe RM can help clarify?

 

1) Monica wasn't in Hs, she is a woman who can make HER OWN decisions.

2) Do you think she was forced to do those things with him? I'm pretty sure they both wanted it, if not we would have heard a different story.

3) It is possible she could have come on to him as well, but she want forced to do it.

4) I hear that all the time from both sexes, "OH you will not believe who I just had sex with", and brag about it, it's plausible here too.

5) and in the photos and videos afterwards when she was near him in public you can clearly tell she is happy, she isn't a person who felt embarrassed or scared to he around him.

 

Actually your posts seem sexist, you are not giving woman enough credit and don't think they can make a decision on their own? If Monica wanted sex with him, or she got at vibe and decided SHE was ok with it, they why is it anyone else's business besides Hillary's? Woman can make their own decisions.

Lol, how was I "sexist"? Maybe RM can help clarify?

 

1) Monica wasn't in Hs, she is a woman who can make HER OWN decisions.

2) Do you think she was forced to do those things with him? I'm pretty sure they both wanted it, if not we would have heard a different story.

3) It is possible she could have come on to him as well, but she want forced to do it.

4) I hear that all the time from both sexes, "OH you will not believe who I just had sex with", and brag about it, it's plausible here too.

5) and in the photos and videos afterwards when she was near him in public you can clearly tell she is happy, she isn't a person who felt embarrassed or scared to he around him.

 

Actually your posts seem sexist, you are not giving woman enough credit and don't think they can make a decision on their own? If Monica wanted sex with him, or she got at vibe and decided SHE was ok with it, they why is it anyone else's business besides Hillary's? Woman can make their own decisions.

 

Most companies would disagree with your stance. If you can't see how a person in power could use their power to get what they want well then we aren't going to agree. There isn't a major corporation I know of today who doesn't have rules in the employee handbook over this exact issue. To much civil risk.

Most companies would disagree with your stance. If you can't see how a person in power could use their power to get what they want well then we aren't going to agree. There isn't a major corporation I know of today who doesn't have rules in the employee handbook over this exact issue. To much civil risk.

Yes, I agree with you.

Affairs are one thing, lying about affairs as well. But it was 'clean up' after the affairs were over that was apparently done by both Clintons that is sad.

 

The Monica affair would get almost any CxO fired in a private company due to the asymmetrical power structure. But before the White House there were women in Arkansas. When these women spoke the truth the Clinton's lied and attacked them. It was a civil suit by one of these women that led to the Lewinsky affair coming to light.

 

It seems attacking and smearing 'the other woman' is fair game.