• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Rush Limbaugh accuses the DCCC of quotemining, threatens to sue

 
 
 
ksen

ksen

Contributor
Joined
Jun 10, 2005
Messages
6,540
Location
Florida
Basic Beliefs
Calvinist
This is the quoted statement:

"How many guys, in your own experience with women, have learned that 'no' means 'yes' if you know how to spot it?" Limbaugh said.
Click to expand...

And this is the claim of Rush's lawyer:
The letter is non responsive and nonsensical. What is incontrovertible is the fact that the DCCC changed Rush Limbaugh's words to convey the opposite of what he said. This is not a matter of opinion; it is obvious.
Click to expand...

What Rush's attorney means to say is, Rush is ineloquent and has trouble clearly expressing what he means to say.
 
Reading the full text of what he did say, I'm not sure how the context helps him at all:

Washington Post said:
“Seduction used to be an art. Now, of course, it’s ‘brutish’ and it’s ‘predatory’ and it’s bad,” he said on the air. Quoting the Ohio State policy, he said, “‘consent must be freely given, and can be withdrawn anytime, and the absence of ‘no’ does not mean ‘yes.’ ”

He then commented, “How many of you guys, in your own experience with women, have learned that ‘no’ means ‘yes’ if you know how to spot it? I’m probably. . . . Let me tell you something, in this modern [world], that is simply, that’s not tolerated. People aren’t even going to try to understand that one. It used to be said as a cliche, it used to be part of the advice young boys were given.” He added, apparently facetiously, “See, that’s what we’ve got to change. We have got to reprogram the way we raise men. So now . . . permission every step of the way, clearly spelling out ‘why.’ [Are] these [policies] not lawsuits waiting to happen if even one of these steps is not taken?”
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...5ffe30-68e8-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html
 
I read that as well, and was finding it hard to see where exactly he was taken out of context. If anything, the text puts it into even more context. Maybe he thinks he feels that his context was "Sexual assault is wrong, but no doesn't necessarily means no" was taken to mean "Sexual assault isn't a big deal." What he actually said was "No doesn't mean no often, so it probably isn't sexual assault."

He is an ass regardless the context taken here.
 
If the words were said in that exact order then it is a direct quote.

Limbaugh is free to try to provide context but there is nothing illegal about directly quoting him.
 
The "Sometimes no means yes," meme is a relic of a long forgotten time. Before the age of safe effective birth control, there were a lot of reasons a woman might have for saying "no" to sex, when sex was something she very much desired. A man depended on his salesmanship to overcome her reticence. The sales metaphor was easy to apply. There are hundreds of sales coaching sermons which go along the line of, "Your customer needs your product and he can afford it. You must get past his no and to his yes." Substitute "her" for "his" and this was what was called "seduction."

Of course, it's all bullshit.

No adult needs to be sold casual sex. It's something one either wants, or doesn't. Rush's sexual awakening(I'm being generous) came well into the age of birth control. His SNMY statement puts him 50 years behind the curve.
 
It's also a relic from an era where women who say "yes" are considered tramps and sluts.
 
Bronzeage said:
No adult needs to be sold casual sex. It's something one either wants, or doesn't. Rush's sexual awakening(I'm being generous) came well into the age of birth control. His SNMY statement puts him 50 years behind the curve.
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, he does say his view is behind the times. He's saying men need to change they way they do things because the old methods he's familiar with aren't tolerated any more, although it's hard to tell if he's serious about that. I still know woman who find persuasiveness and relentless pursuit sexy and flattering, and who want to be convinced and seduced, rather than just asked. That used to be more common.

Of course even with the aid of a time-capsule, 'no means yes if you know how to spot it' is terrible advice, and always has been. It just used to be common terrible advice. So I'd say his statement is only 80-75% bullshit, with a dash of misogyny on top.
 
Togo said:
Bronzeage said:
No adult needs to be sold casual sex. It's something one either wants, or doesn't. Rush's sexual awakening(I'm being generous) came well into the age of birth control. His SNMY statement puts him 50 years behind the curve.
Click to expand...

Well, to be fair, he does say his view is behind the times. He's saying men need to change they way they do things because the old methods he's familiar with aren't tolerated any more, although it's hard to tell if he's serious about that. I still know woman who find persuasiveness and relentless pursuit sexy and flattering, and who want to be convinced and seduced, rather than just asked. That used to be more common.

Of course even with the aid of a time-capsule, 'no means yes if you know how to spot it' is terrible advice, and always has been. It just used to be common terrible advice. So I'd say his statement is only 80-75% bullshit, with a dash of misogyny on top.
Click to expand...

I'm all about fairness, but I heard Rush's little sermon. I don't think he is advocating change. I think that is the spin his publicity people tried to give it.

If a man is persuasive, relentless pursuit should not be necessary, since there is no need to pursue a woman who is not running away. I don't know any woman who thinks stalking is sexy. For the most women, whatever good feelings she might have for a particular man, these feelings evaporate if he continues to pursue a woman who makes it clear she is not interested.
 
PyramidHead said:
Reading the full text of what he did say, I'm not sure how the context helps him at all:

Washington Post said:
“Seduction used to be an art. Now, of course, it’s ‘brutish’ and it’s ‘predatory’ and it’s bad,” he said on the air. Quoting the Ohio State policy, he said, “‘consent must be freely given, and can be withdrawn anytime, and the absence of ‘no’ does not mean ‘yes.’ ”

He then commented, “How many of you guys, in your own experience with women, have learned that ‘no’ means ‘yes’ if you know how to spot it? I’m probably. . . . Let me tell you something, in this modern [world], that is simply, that’s not tolerated. People aren’t even going to try to understand that one. It used to be said as a cliche, it used to be part of the advice young boys were given.” He added, apparently facetiously, “See, that’s what we’ve got to change. We have got to reprogram the way we raise men. So now . . . permission every step of the way, clearly spelling out ‘why.’ [Are] these [policies] not lawsuits waiting to happen if even one of these steps is not taken?”
Click to expand...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifes...5ffe30-68e8-11e4-b053-65cea7903f2e_story.html
Click to expand...

It's because in their minds what they are saying is just and godly. They don't get how what they say can be injurious or insulting. To the "righteous" people at least. They live in a world built for "the good guys", i.e., bible-toting white males with a fat wallet, sign of God's favor™.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom