IRS Agent bullies man into sex.

[SEVERUSMAX]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/07...g-tax-penalty/

So much for sexual harassment laws. This could be considered rape, possibly, albeit rape by extortion.

Says a lot about the caliber of the government that wants us to give up our weapons and trust them, if you ask me.

[DeeZire]

Sev - did you read the article, or just the headline?

Burroughs, who claims he was sexually harassed and intimidated, had sex with Abrahamson in his home that evening as a result.

IRS agents can't just make up imaginary penalties. He was offered the opportunity to avoid paying a penalty by having sex with a woman. In other words, he acted as a male prostitute - he engaged in sex for money. This would, indeed, make a good plot bunny for a LIT story, but I don't see any connection to rape. I also don't see the need for weapons to protect ourselves from engaging in prostitution.

I would like to remind you that the government has no intention of taking away our weapons. That's Right Wing propaganda designed to appeal to the ill-informed and the fearful among us who don't know anything about the 2nd Amendment or the Heller decision. Fox News is a propaganda outlet, not a news organization. Its target audience is the ill-informed and fearful. They have to be to accept the Fox view of the world. In order to avoid being brainwashed by Fox News, one must take these few simple steps - expose yourself to PBS (especially Bill Moyers) NPR and Al Jazeera, and read some dead-tree media that's held to higher standards than internet bloggers. I would recommend The Week - a weekly news magazine that presents both sides of the issues so the reader can grasp the entire dynamic of the event, not just a single, biased POV.

[SEVERUSMAX]

So, blackmail and extortion are prostitution now, not rape or harassment? Nice to know. Did you miss the stick for the carrot?

PBS is a taxpayer-funded leftist propaganda network. NBC, etc. waste more time attacking Fox than actually reporting news. And Al-Jazeera is run by a foreign government (both before and after buying out Al Gore, did you forget THAT scandal).

Are they reporting the Menendez underage hooker scandal? Seriously, the pot calling the kettle black.

The lies that the Establishment is not after Second Amendment rights are easily uncovered, once one stops falling for the "assault weapons" straw man argument and seeing the slow erosion of rights by encroachment, tyranny on the installment plan. Registration and other such things are just a step in that direction. Once they know who has the weapons, they plan to grab them. "Assault weapons" have been banned since the 30s (remember the National Firearms Act).

Sell your straw man elsewhere.

[NekoParks]

I am shocked, appalled, and titillated—but not necessarily in that order.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by NekoParks

I am shocked, appalled, and titillated—but not necessarily in that order.

I admit to a kink for power differences, especially when they flip heteronormativity on its head...

[JackLuis]

So instead of the IRS fucking this guy, he has to fuck the IRS?

How ugly was she?

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

So why did he turn down pussy? QUEER! I knew it.

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Originally Posted by JackLuis

So instead of the IRS fucking this guy, he has to fuck the IRS?

How ugly was she?

No pussy is ugly.

[NekoParks]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

I admit to a kink for power differences, especially when they flip heteronormativity on its head...

Me too. Something about throwing a brawny man down and having my way with him. Okay. Definitely not PC but he could get away from me if he wanted to. . . . and I would still respect him afterwards.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by NekoParks

Me too. Something about throwing a brawny man down and having my way with him. Okay. Definitely not PC but he could get away from me if he wanted to. . . . and I would still respect him afterwards.

Have you written this scenario?

I have something like it tucked in a corner of my brain. Got no further plot for it, though.

[NekoParks]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

Have you written this scenario?

I have something like it tucked in a corner of my brain. Got no further plot for it, though.

Not yet, but I saw a similar scene in Never Talk to Strangers in which Rebecca DeMorney threw Antonio Banderas against a fence, ripped down his jeans, and bit his ass. All I could think was I w-w-want to do that NOW! What made it so sexy was Banderas's attitude. He had a little smirk like he was really a top and letting her play with him. Oh boy, an obsession was born with the man (Banderas) and the action. It was the first time I ever considered the fact that I could be a top or at the very least a switch or some kind of less than vanilla lover.

[Stella_Omega]

I think a lot of us write as a way of exploring our own ids...

[NekoParks]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

I think a lot of us write as a way of exploring our own ids...

I agree. I still remember how shocked I was at my reaction.

[TE999]

IMHO the plaintiff in the case is as full of shit as a Port-A-John at an all-day rock concert. I mean, really, she forced him to have sex with her to offset a penalty? Huh, what? Hells bells, if some IRS chick told me if we bumped uglies I wouldn't have to pay up, I'd plow her like the back forty in the springtime.

Or maybe this guy's just a wuss.

[YDB95]

Not that it justifies what the IRS agent did (if she is in fact guilty), but I don't suppose anyone has heard as to whether the guy was in fact in arrears on his taxes? As much as we love to hate the IRS, most of the horror stories you hear are baloney.

[SEVERUSMAX]

Ever consider that he just didn't want to fuck someone who had more power than him, that it was a turn-off? Not everyone finds it erotic.

[YDB95]

Then surely you stand with the decades' worth of feminists who have been fighting for more stringent sexual harassment laws. Because what you described there is exactly what they want to put a stop to.

[SEVERUSMAX]

First of all, this is public sector. A little different from private sector. I don't mind stopping coercion. I do find it odd that it's apparently okay to harass a man, but not a woman.....hmmmm....judging by attitudes here.

Coercion is not the same, btw, as simply jokes, statements, opinions, etc. that create the nebulous "hostile working environment". Too vague and easily exploited for my preference.

If there is genuine sexual coercion, however, that's pretty serious.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by SEVERUSMAX

First of all, this is public sector. A little different from private sector. I don't mind stopping coercion. I do find it odd that it's apparently okay to harass a man, but not a woman.....hmmmm....judging by attitudes here.

Not so much-- just so very rare, and the other way so very common, that society has a hard time taking stories like this one seriously--this is an indictment of the norm, by the way.

Feminism addresses this phenomenon with full seriousness.

Coercion is not the same, btw, as simply jokes, statements, opinions, etc. that create the nebulous "hostile working environment". Too vague and easily exploited for my preference.

If there is genuine sexual coercion, however, that's pretty serious.

And of course you get to decide where the line is drawn.

[SEVERUSMAX]

Well, if it's too vague, there is no more free speech, only censorship, and there is no presumption of innocence, only presumption of guilt.

Anyway, my point was that the whole thing was meant to stop coercion and has mushroomed into something far less clear or rational. And that there was the appearance of a double standard, always a pet peeve of mine.

[Stella_Omega]

you are speaking freely right now. Moderating your sense of entitlement in mixed company is not censorship.

And yes, the parameters are changing quickly-- much of society lags behind. This will create confusion until enough people have caught up.

[SEVERUSMAX]

Originally Posted by Stella_Omega

you are speaking freely right now. Moderating your sense of entitlement in mixed company is not censorship.

And yes, the parameters are changing quickly-- much of society lags behind. This will create confusion until enough people have caught up.

So, we're back to Victorian ideas....don't talk of sex in mixed company? Bizarre.

[YDB95]

Originally Posted by SEVERUSMAX

So, we're back to Victorian ideas....don't talk of sex in mixed company? Bizarre.

No one said that. If your point is that the line isn't always very clear, well, that's true. But there IS a line, and it should not be crossed, and your right to free speech ends where your co-workers' right to a safe and comfortable work environment begins.

I do agree that what the IRS agent did, if true, is a crime and should be punished, just as much as Clarence Thomas should have been punished for what he did to Anita Hill. But I already said that.

[SEVERUSMAX]

Last time I checked, there's no Constitutional right not to be offended.

Now, if you're talking of something more threatening, well....clarify that. Threats are not the same as offensive comments.

[Stella_Omega]

Originally Posted by SEVERUSMAX

So, we're back to Victorian ideas....don't talk of sex in mixed company? Bizarre.

Don't talk misogyny in mixed company.

And the sex jokes that man tell? There are not many that aren't misogynistic. Even gay jokes belittle women, right along with the gay men they belittle.

Moreover, there are none that are not predicated on a man's assumption that women want to applaud his assumptions. (If he didn't assume that, he wouldn't tell them.)