Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: So they only fucked once, and she is THAT dangerous to him....I don't get it... [View all]Tumbulu
(6,278 posts)50. Maybe, but this is a woman who makes a living
using her body as currency. In this case she chose to just go along ( although she made sure not to get stuck again going forward). So there is this sense that she went along ...and with unprotected sex, not really a good idea.
Sorry, I call it coerced because it is her default position. And she does not think it was coerced because it is normal to her. But looking at it from the outside, it is quite the opposite.
His assuming that they would have sex because she went to the bathroom is imposing to say the least.
I am reading this reaction from plenty of women. Plenty of women have gotten stuck in sucky sex situations where it is easier to just go along and get out asap. That does not actually make it truly consensual.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
67 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
So they only fucked once, and she is THAT dangerous to him....I don't get it... [View all]
jodymarie aimee
Mar 2018
OP
I looked at the timing ...the kid could be Trumps...she says it was with a boyfriend but unless she
Demsrule86
Mar 2018
#16
IDK what "not impressed" means. If this was a democrat, they would be gone from govt by morning
Eliot Rosewater
Mar 2018
#28
I thought they had sex I 2011...my mistake that was when she first tried to tell her story.
Demsrule86
Mar 2018
#44
Reading a lot of "nothing to see here" , i bet if this was about you know who
Eliot Rosewater
Mar 2018
#21
Regardless of that, I get suspicious when I see anyone imply "nothing to see here"
Eliot Rosewater
Mar 2018
#25
So you are saying that she couldn't have just decided, out of her volition, to have sex with him
IluvPitties
Mar 2018
#49
She has a kid...paternity is mentioned in the agreement...I have to wonder if the kid is Donald's.
Demsrule86
Mar 2018
#9
I believe it was mentioned that that was standard language in all his NDAs. They covered all bases.
KewlKat
Mar 2018
#40
Exactly what it would be every second of Faux if this were a Dem ... "President Blackmailed ...
mr_lebowski
Mar 2018
#54
This case is going to be a big problem for Don-o. So goes one NDA so can go the rest.
Kirk Lover
Mar 2018
#15
It's the payoff before the election, and that he isn't the stud he thinks he is
nadine_mn
Mar 2018
#26
I still think we're missing a piece of the picture - about the timing and need for a payoff
Siwsan
Mar 2018
#33
It has nothing to do with the illicit sex. Unless it is really out there like incest.
AgadorSparticus
Mar 2018
#65