Robert Foster, GOP governor candidate, denies woman reporter access because of her gender

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I mean, I could refuse to go to my bosses' office because I think he might rape me, since men do rape. Would that be an issue to discuss? Agree with PP who said the answer is to let only women in the office. Men are just too dangerous. They can all work together on landscaping.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

According to the FBI only 2% of accusations of rape and related sexual offenses are determined to be false. This is the same as the rate of false accusations of other felonies. So I would be inclined to believe the accusation

And you wonder why he's refusing to be alone with her.

absurb. you'd only refuse if you have a paranoid belief that every woman is a false accuser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

Crickets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I mean, I could refuse to go to my bosses' office because I think he might rape me, since men do rape. Would that be an issue to discuss? Agree with PP who said the answer is to let only women in the office. Men are just too dangerous. They can all work together on landscaping.

Only at men's houses, though. I am a woman and I don't want men landscaping at my house. I can't trust them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

you know their answer - that women shouldn't be in the workplace to start with. just let men do all the work and live out in public without wearing a burqa. women belong at home. they can only leave the house if chaperoned by a male relative.

[Anonymous]

I suspect his real concern is that if the reporter traveled with him for a day, she would trick him into saying some of his crazy racist thoughts out loud.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I suspect his real concern is that if the reporter traveled with him for a day, she would trick him into saying some of his crazy racist thoughts out loud.

I suspect really this was a dumb publicity stunt for a low polling wannabe, and it did exactly as intended. And I'm the OP of this thread - regretting how much attention this dumb jacka** is getting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

Crickets

Then she sends an email to her boss so there is a written record of said request. That's what I would require. Then once the email is sent and she wants to discuss matters with me I will refer her to HR, they should handle these matters and keep me looped in. Same for a male.

Her boss can grant leave but payroll/HR handle the leave requests while I just approve them. If it's an urgent matter that's all I need to know, the details are irrelevant. Just request the leave for me to approve and say it's urgent and I'll do that. But I don't have the power to do it as there are regulations so HR has to be contacted and that I need written requests.

Now...that wasn't so hard was it? I mean for the modern liberal feminists simple tasks seem daunting and complex, but theyr'e really not.

As for the candidate, it's his bu his rules. She doesn't have to like them. She doesn't have to get the interview either. And as past precedent has shown, mean don't get the right of innocent until proven guilty. The court of public opinion rules by the liberal media assumes guilt right of the bat for this fella. Unless your a democratic governor who dressed in racist makeup you're not given a free pass. He's right to do this and i see his point. As the fact they tried to destroy one SCOTUS...actually two SCOTUS judges, and various other high profile people he's practicing due diligence and not putting his family and career at risk. If i was him the two first things for me is my life, family and career...what some no-name journalist from Mississippi wants to think of me is so low on the totem pole ir ranks beneath what did my dog eat for dinner last night and wondering if if I should use the oxford comma or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

Crickets

Then she sends an email to her boss so there is a written record of said request. That's what I would require. Then once the email is sent and she wants to discuss matters with me I will refer her to HR, they should handle these matters and keep me looped in. Same for a male.

Her boss can grant leave but payroll/HR handle the leave requests while I just approve them. If it's an urgent matter that's all I need to know, the details are irrelevant. Just request the leave for me to approve and say it's urgent and I'll do that. But I don't have the power to do it as there are regulations so HR has to be contacted and that I need written requests.

Now...that wasn't so hard was it? I mean for the modern liberal feminists simple tasks seem daunting and complex, but theyr'e really not.

As for the candidate, it's his bu his rules. She doesn't have to like them. She doesn't have to get the interview either. And as past precedent has shown, mean don't get the right of innocent until proven guilty. The court of public opinion rules by the liberal media assumes guilt right of the bat for this fella. Unless your a democratic governor who dressed in racist makeup you're not given a free pass. He's right to do this and i see his point. As the fact they tried to destroy one SCOTUS...actually two SCOTUS judges, and various other high profile people he's practicing due diligence and not putting his family and career at risk. If i was him the two first things for me is my life, family and career...what some no-name journalist from Mississippi wants to think of me is so low on the totem pole ir ranks beneath what did my dog eat for dinner last night and wondering if if I should use the oxford comma or not.

Christ, man. That's a lot of dumb packed into one post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I mean, I could refuse to go to my bosses' office because I think he might rape me, since men do rape. Would that be an issue to discuss? Agree with PP who said the answer is to let only women in the office. Men are just too dangerous. They can all work together on landscaping.

Well by your logic a man should never be a lone with woman because women have made false accusations of rape and sexual assault against men. So what’s your problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

Crickets

Then she sends an email to her boss so there is a written record of said request. That's what I would require. Then once the email is sent and she wants to discuss matters with me I will refer her to HR, they should handle these matters and keep me looped in. Same for a male.

Her boss can grant leave but payroll/HR handle the leave requests while I just approve them. If it's an urgent matter that's all I need to know, the details are irrelevant. Just request the leave for me to approve and say it's urgent and I'll do that. But I don't have the power to do it as there are regulations so HR has to be contacted and that I need written requests.

Now...that wasn't so hard was it? I mean for the modern liberal feminists simple tasks seem daunting and complex, but theyr'e really not.

As for the candidate, it's his bu his rules. She doesn't have to like them. She doesn't have to get the interview either. And as past precedent has shown, mean don't get the right of innocent until proven guilty. The court of public opinion rules by the liberal media assumes guilt right of the bat for this fella. Unless your a democratic governor who dressed in racist makeup you're not given a free pass. He's right to do this and i see his point. As the fact they tried to destroy one SCOTUS...actually two SCOTUS judges, and various other high profile people he's practicing due diligence and not putting his family and career at risk. If i was him the two first things for me is my life, family and career...what some no-name journalist from Mississippi wants to think of me is so low on the totem pole ir ranks beneath what did my dog eat for dinner last night and wondering if if I should use the oxford comma or not.

Just say that you love being Offred and you don’t think women should work outside the home. Or you could move to Saudi Arabia - they just use the name “Allah” instead of the name “God” and they already have a whacky, Rube Goldberg, misogynist set-up like you’re hungering for.

[Anonymous]

Great piece by Karol Markowicz. It's a short piece - you should read the whole thing, but here is the pertinent part:

Beyond the religious-liberty implications, men’s reticence about being alone with women shouldn’t surprise anyone. The #MeToo movement of the last few years has brought a chorus of voices urging us to “Believe all women” making assault or harassment allegations.

When “Believe all women” is the party line, it’s only prudent for men to take themselves out of situations where they risk being accused of anything. #MeToo began with a serious mission of exposing powerful men who had sexually harassed, and in some cases assaulted, women and gotten away with it.

But thanks to “Believe all women,” it spiraled to a place where accusations went unchecked and were instantly believed. Some websites maintain running lists of accused men, even if accusations are anonymous and/or largely uncorroborated.

In some cases, the accusation didn’t even make any sense. The comedian Aziz Ansari is clawing his way out of a reputational black hole after a woman accused him of being a bad date. He didn’t harass or assault anyone; he was simply bad at hooking up, and his date wrote a scathing piece about it.

Men have seen that they are guilty until proved innocent, and sometimes not even then. They have now — wisely — retreated from women.

Are men afraid to be alone with women? Of course they are. Robert Foster is just one of the few to admit it.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/14/believe-all-women-makes-the-pence-rule-just-common-sense/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's pose a hypothetical. Say this particular female reporter did go with Foster on the campaign trail and spent lots of time alone with him. Then say she accused him of sexual misconduct. Who would you believe?

This was asked before and no one answered it. So curious.

it's because it's completely f-in' irrelevant.

Actually, it's absolutely relevant and you know it. It gets to the very issue that you seem unwilling to address. Would you believe him or her?

I hope you are not raising your sons this way. What enfeebled women they will marry.

Nice deflection. Try actually answering the question next time.

Why don't you try actually answering the question of why such men don't avoid meeting alone with other men when men are statistically more likely to murder you than woman are to falsely accuse you of something?

Why don't you try actually answering the question of how women employees are supposed to have confidential meetings with their bosses or colleagues - say for a performance review - when the doors always have to be open and presumably anyone walking by can overhear? Meaning male employees can have confidential evaluations of their work but not women if all the bosses are men.

Why won't you answer these? Probably because you're a hypocrite who knows there's not a decent answer.

Still no one defending this guy who will answer these questions.

Government employees are required to have a performance review once a year. If Foster was the supervisor of female employees, he would require that another male employee sit in on their review. What the ever loving cluster-f*ck is that? Who of you would put up with someone else not your boss sitting in your supposedly confidential evaluation?

What if a female employee needed to request an extended leave because of some very personal matters - she couldn't have a confidential conversation with her male boss about it, but would have to have a male employee with her?

You who say there is never a reason for 2 adults to have a confidential conversation behind closed doors suffer from serious lack of imagination.

Crickets

Then she sends an email to her boss so there is a written record of said request. That's what I would require. Then once the email is sent and she wants to discuss matters with me I will refer her to HR, they should handle these matters and keep me looped in. Same for a male.

Her boss can grant leave but payroll/HR handle the leave requests while I just approve them. If it's an urgent matter that's all I need to know, the details are irrelevant. Just request the leave for me to approve and say it's urgent and I'll do that. But I don't have the power to do it as there are regulations so HR has to be contacted and that I need written requests.

Now...that wasn't so hard was it? I mean for the modern liberal feminists simple tasks seem daunting and complex, but theyr'e really not.

As for the candidate, it's his bu his rules. She doesn't have to like them. She doesn't have to get the interview either. And as past precedent has shown, mean don't get the right of innocent until proven guilty. The court of public opinion rules by the liberal media assumes guilt right of the bat for this fella. Unless your a democratic governor who dressed in racist makeup you're not given a free pass. He's right to do this and i see his point. As the fact they tried to destroy one SCOTUS...actually two SCOTUS judges, and various other high profile people he's practicing due diligence and not putting his family and career at risk. If i was him the two first things for me is my life, family and career...what some no-name journalist from Mississippi wants to think of me is so low on the totem pole ir ranks beneath what did my dog eat for dinner last night and wondering if if I should use the oxford comma or not.

You didn't answer the question of how a female worker is supposed to get a confidential performance review from her male boss if she has to have a male chaperone sit in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Great piece by Karol Markowicz. It's a short piece - you should read the whole thing, but here is the pertinent part:

Beyond the religious-liberty implications, men’s reticence about being alone with women shouldn’t surprise anyone. The #MeToo movement of the last few years has brought a chorus of voices urging us to “Believe all women” making assault or harassment allegations.

When “Believe all women” is the party line, it’s only prudent for men to take themselves out of situations where they risk being accused of anything. #MeToo began with a serious mission of exposing powerful men who had sexually harassed, and in some cases assaulted, women and gotten away with it.

But thanks to “Believe all women,” it spiraled to a place where accusations went unchecked and were instantly believed. Some websites maintain running lists of accused men, even if accusations are anonymous and/or largely uncorroborated.

In some cases, the accusation didn’t even make any sense. The comedian Aziz Ansari is clawing his way out of a reputational black hole after a woman accused him of being a bad date. He didn’t harass or assault anyone; he was simply bad at hooking up, and his date wrote a scathing piece about it.

Men have seen that they are guilty until proved innocent, and sometimes not even then. They have now — wisely — retreated from women.

Are men afraid to be alone with women? Of course they are. Robert Foster is just one of the few to admit it.

https://nypost.com/2019/07/14/believe-all-women-makes-the-pence-rule-just-common-sense/

I'm sorry, but are women supposed to be f*cking chaperoned on dates now too so that men don't have to suffer the risk of someone calling them out on their sh*t? Or what is the point of bringing in Aziz Ansari?

Just f*cking say it: YOU HATE WOMEN and you think that women are bad, polluted, and don't belong in public because we are untrustworthy witches.