Were the comments about Lauren only about her being a woman? Or were they tied to her actual, known behavior?
So was Heels Up Kamala. It was well known that she was in a sugar relationship with Willie Brown and that he put her on state boards in return.
It's a well known conjecture but far from proven. And your obvious disrespect for women grows with every one of your posts.
You seem to not get the fact that people in loving relationships try to help each other out. I helped my wife get through college to get her two bachelor degrees before we got married.
Never mind loving relationships, or even sexual ones; It has been true since the beginning of recorded history that older statesmen and power brokers provide mentoring, patronage, and career progression to younger statesmen, in exchange for their political support and loyalty.
It should surprise nobody that, as more women enter politics, these relationships are more likely to be suspected of including a sexual element (although that was also often rumoured, and likely frequently true, when all the participants were men, too).
It should also surprise nobody that as women in politics are a fairly recent phenomenon, opposite sex mentor-mentee relationships are typically young woman with older man, and not young man with older woman.
The assumption that mentees are providing sexual favours to mentors was always a good source of malicious rumour, and an excellent way to undermine the upcoming generation of young politicians, statesmen, and power brokers of your political opponents.
Add a bunch of fundamentally sexist assumptions, and you have Derec's opinions as stated in this thread and elsewhere.
Even if true, the sexual gossip would be irrelevant (as it always was) to public policy or governance.
If young politicians or their mentors are corrupt or corrupted in their relationships, then that's a matter for the law and the relevant anti-corruption authorities to consider. Whether that corruption involves sexual, financial, or political favours, or is a consequence of familial or nepotistic behaviours, shouldn't matter.
Yet Derec somehow doesn't feel the need to track down and expose senators who do political favours for their sons, or for wealthy 'donors'; Only young women who get patronage from powerful older men attract his innuendo and his disapprobation.
I wonder why?
