Mother, mother, mother - there's too many of you crying.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I think everyone on this board believes that part of being in a relationship is an understanding that there are certain personal things you do not discuss with other people.

We certainly have very different notions of relationship - I don't recall that Atticus said he wouldn't mind if his wife his wife confided all of her personal feelings in another man and not him, but I might have. That doesn't sound like a particularly healthy relationship, but to me the problem isn't in her having other sources of emotional support - which doesn't bother me at all - but in her not seeing me as one of them. The ida of an "emotional affair" is pretty absurd.

Again, if you're expecting total privacy about something, I bet you aren't actually getting it. I don't expect it. I expect respect and discretion. If there's something she needs to share with her mother or her close group of friends, people whom she trusts to also be discrete and respectful, I'd actually encourage that. Of course she can share whatever with her healthcare providers.

If she starts telling people without those expectations of respect and discretion, it matters a huge amount who and why. If the why is she felt threatened by me, I've got zero leg to stand on to complain about it. If she's doing it to humiliate me behind my back, yeah, that's bad but again it sounds like we've got other bigger issues.

And celebrities can and should have those expectations.

Even as to a one night stand?

There you go again, trying to bring it back to a very specific set of circumstances. Whatever.

What a strange thing for me to do in a conversation that started from whether Ansari's privacy was violated...

What if she felt victimized because he didn't drive her home and revealed all of his personal, sexual attributes and tendencies?

If she revealed things that were not what caused her to feel violated or were at least reasonably necessary to explain the cause of the violation, then sure, again, she is behaving in a way that deserves our disapproval.

What if she misheard something he said and did an interview about everything?

If it was an honest misunderstanding, she did nothing wrong.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

Read the Abby Honold piece I linked above. She's a victim and an advocate and not a lawyer, so yeah, there are things that aren't perfectly accurate in it, but it should at least give you some sense of how its not "clearly not an assault."

That article isn't as helpful as you think. This idea that the person who feels victimized is the last and only say in whether not she was assaulted is not correct.

"Because what Ansari did was wrong, despite the fact that no one is calling for him to go to prison or register as a sex offender. Grace says that she was sexually assaulted. And really, that’s not up for debate by anyone else."

Wrong. We all need to understand what is and isn't sexual assault. She can assert without challenge that Ansari acted overly aggressive, inconsiderate, selfish, etc. But we absolutely get to decide whether or not she was sexually assaulted. Those words have meaning. And we have defined them (legally and otherwise). She does not get to replace that definition with her own. And again, that doesn't mean by doing so we are necessarily negating her feelings or dismissing her very negative experience.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

She's not enforcing it? Ty and Sebby told me his career is in grave danger.

Ah. You've gone full-on ridiculous.

Let me ask you this. You and I are friends. I have an expectation that you aren't racist. You call me a silly coon. I am offended. I have no legal recourse. I can't punish you or sanction you. Does that mean the expectation shouldn't exist?

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

The next time you encounter someone who tells you that you need to just listen to women on these subjects, hand them Caitlin Flanagan's article in the Atlantic and stand back.

The reason why arguing about this shit with Adder is so frustrating is that he's coming from the right place. We've all shut out women's opinions on women's issues and ethnically diverse people's voices on issues that matter to us. We can all do better by sitting and actually listening when it comes to issues we may not be in the best position to define for everyone.

But this idea that anyone has to cede their ability to think or give up the urge to disagree is insanity. I am a feminist. Are my views on sexual assault as informed as the women who've experienced it? Of course not. Do I have the ability to listen to a number of different perspectives and formulate ideas of my own? Yeah. It seems to me like Adder is constantly confronting people who say they listen to more informed perspectives but aren't, even when that isn't actually happening.

Being a woman doesn't make you automatically more correct about feminist issues. Being a black man doesn't automatically make you more correct about racism. Etc.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

We certainly have very different notions of relationship - I don't recall that Atticus said he wouldn't mind if his wife his wife confided all of her personal feelings in another man and not him, but I might have. That doesn't sound like a particularly healthy relationship, but to me the problem isn't in her having other sources of emotional support - which doesn't bother me at all - but in her not seeing me as one of them. The ida of an "emotional affair" is pretty absurd.

But you just defined it. Confiding deep and personal feelings in another man and not you is an emotional affair. You would be absolutely correct to be upset about it. And that's okay. That's part of what comes along with a meaningful relationship.

Originally Posted by Adder

Again, if you're expecting total privacy about something, I bet you aren't actually getting it.

Why do you keep phrasing it this way? Is it because it's easier to make your argument or are you just trying to be difficult?

No one expects total anything. But there are lines. Presumably, when you settle into a relationship your lines match her lines, you talk about the lines, or someone crosses a line about what they're sharing and the other person gets upset and a conversation is had about where those lines should be.

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't expect it. I expect respect and discretion.

You can't possibly think we aren't saying the exact same fucking thing.

Originally Posted by Adder

If there's something she needs to share with her mother or her close group of friends, people whom she trusts to also be discrete and respectful, I'd actually encourage that. Of course she can share whatever with her healthcare providers.

Ah. Now you've started defining what's okay. Presumably you could start a list of what isn't. And really, that just means we're agreeing.

Originally Posted by Adder

If she starts telling people without those expectations of respect and discretion, it matters a huge amount who and why. If the why is she felt threatened by me, I've got zero leg to stand on to complain about it. If she's doing it to humiliate me behind my back, yeah, that's bad but again it sounds like we've got other bigger issues.

Yes to all of this. Agree 100%.

Originally Posted by Adder

Even as to a one night stand?

Yeah. Once again, the expectation and the reality may not necessarily align. And as you've said, there is no recourse. But if George Clooney connects with someone and they have sex, you're saying that he should have zero expectation that that person respect his privacy just because he's famous?

I'm sure he understands that she's immediately going to tell all her friends. His expectation may be tempered when it comes to that. But he should have no expectation that she not immediately run to TMZ or write an article about how he was really into water sports? Obviously, the more one night stands he has, the higher the chances he runs into someone who doesn't respect those expectations. But it's not fair to say he doesn't deserve to have an expectation of privacy simply because he's famous.

Originally Posted by Adder

What a strange thing for me to do in a conversation that started from whether Ansari's privacy was violated...

Ah. Now you're going to pretend like the conversation, which has clearly evolved based on the very post you're posting in, hasn't. This response is dumb.

TM

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Wrong. We all need to understand what is and isn't sexual assault. She can assert without challenge that Ansari acted overly aggressive, inconsiderate, selfish, etc. But we absolutely get to decide whether or not she was sexually assaulted. Those words have meaning. And we have defined them (legally and otherwise). She does not get to replace that definition with her own. And again, that doesn't mean by doing so we are necessarily negating her feelings or dismissing her very negative experience.

TM

I have a sexual encounter in my past that I don't remember. I was insanely drunk at a party early in the semester when I was 21 years old when I was studying overseas, and at some point I went into a bedroom with a guy and had sex. Afterwards, I passed out on the bed, and the guy who lived in that suite later helped me figure out what happened, and he got me home.

I can remember the shirt and jeans I was wearing, and I can remember his first name. And I know what he looks like better than a lot of other people I've met over the years, because his picture (along with the rest of our class, first years both in graduate and undergraduate are considered the same class there) is in my office. I can remember flashes of actually having sex. I have no memory of talking to him, and I later found out that no one else saw me with this guy. Apparently I was a mystery for months afterwards. I'm pretty sure that the guy I slept with was also ridiculously drunk. And I couldn't tell you whose idea it was for us to have sex. But it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if I was enthusiastic in my reception to the idea because I get really excited about what I think are good ideas when I'm drunk. He was either 17 or 18, a freshman, so maybe I was the aggressor. He came by the next day to find out if we needed to get a morning after pill*, which I thought was really sweet, but I started my period at some point that morning, so we were in the clear. I never really talked to him again.

It's been almost 24 years and I still go back and forth on whether there was assault, and if so, on whose part. I certainly didn't think so at the time. I felt a little guilty about it, slutty. I regretted it, but I regretted the entire situation of getting that drunk to the point of not remembering as much as I did having sex and not knowing a damned thing about it. And just not sure. Confusion was and continues to be my overwhelming feeling about it. I have no idea what he felt about it, but he did not talk about it with anyone else.** He also avoided me for the rest of our time there, and I never could tell if it was because of shame or fear. I never said anything about it to anyone, and with the exception of a comment on facebook a few days ago, this is the first time I've ever really told anyone about it. When I think about my sexual past, I don't consider him a partner in any way, shape, or form. But I suppose he was as much a part of it as anyone I was aware of having sex with.

I am pretty sure, though, in this day and age, there are a lot of people who would unconditionally call what happened at that party assault, and they'd be royally pissed about it because I would be the worst witness in the world, and worse, sympathetic to him. I had no capacity whatsoever to give consent. But I'm pretty sure he didn't either. Did we assault each other? Is my reluctance to call it assault due to a feeling of complicity in allowing myself to get that drunk? Or that I don't want to be a victim? Or have my identity include sexual assault survivor? If I had a better memory of what happened, would I have clearer feelings about it?

This is a messy, messy area, with some bright lines, but even those aren't cut and dried. There's a shit ton of stuff that is blurry, especially when alcohol is involved. And the people involved don't know each other very well. And there's a lot of conflicting emotion and hopes and expectation built in. I think our reactions to these things help unpack a little on whether or not something bad happened.

I was talking with another woman**** about babe.net story last night, and she's annoyed by it because she feels that the story infantizies the woman and robs her of agency. She also noted that she has been assaulted, and talking about whatever happened between Grace and Ansari should never be in the same conversation. Because as uncomfortable as it would have been for Grace, she could have left at any time during the encounter. The woman I was talking to could not. And neither could I.

*Such a thing was not available in the US at the time. I would avail myself upon it's availability a few weeks later in the "kinda rape" incident. Which is a lot funnier than it sounds.

**It was a VERY gossipy place, with a bathroom gossip column that came out every week. If anyone knew who I was, it would have made the gossip column. One friend guessed, and another was utterly shocked when she found out it was me because people were so not sure. Apparently, I was "a mystery."

***I don't HAVE to maintain her privacy here, but it'd be shitty not to.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

But if George Clooney connects with someone and they have sex, you're saying that he should have zero expectation that that person respect his privacy just because he's famous?

You aren't going to like this. I'm saying if George Clooney connects with someone and they "have sex" that left her feeling violated, he has zero expectation of privacy about what she felt was violating.

Heck, if you asked him when he was single, I think he'd probably tell you that practically speaking he couldn't really expect privacy from a casual hookup even if enthusiastically consensual. I'm sure he didn't like that, and I'm sure he would have tried to be very careful about partners and probably avoid that sort of encounter, but he had to know that there was a real risk that someone would blab just because of who he is. Yes, the person who blabbed for that reason alone has acted boorishly. Is it really unexpected, though?

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Adder

You aren't going to like this. I'm saying if George Clooney connects with someone and they "have sex" that left her feeling violated, he has zero expectation of privacy about what she felt was violating.

I understand that. But we need to establish a baseline before moving on to when he should lose the right to that expectation, no?

On that spectrum of behavior that ranges from "shared a meaningful, respectful, generous, and fulfilling night" to "rape," there lies a point where he may think they were having fun, hasn't forced her to do anything and yet hasn't acted in a way his sexual partner feels happy about. And I think it's at this point where the two of us diverge.

Obviously his expectation of privacy diminishes the further you go from left to right on that spectrum. But you keep arguing that he should have absolutely no expectation of privacy in a situation in which he may not have even picked up on how he made someone feel uncomfortable. I disagree.

Originally Posted by Adder

Heck, if you asked him when he was single, I think he'd probably tell you that practically speaking he couldn't really expect privacy from a casual hookup even if enthusiastically consensual. I'm sure he didn't like that, and I'm sure he would have tried to be very careful about partners and probably avoid that sort of encounter, but he had to know that there was a real risk that someone would blab just because of who he is. Yes, the person who blabbed for that reason alone has acted boorishly. Is it really unexpected, though?

Again, we're talking about two different things. When he is seeking out someone who he thinks will be discrete and chooses partners carefully, that's evidence that he has an expectation that they respect his privacy. Because it's difficult to do or because it's not exactly realistic given how our world works is beside the point. The probability that his partner blabs to the press is way higher in all circumstances for him. But even if people are completely awful and it's probably impossible to assume anyone, no matter how decent they seem, will respect his expectation of privacy, does that mean he shouldn't have one? Just because people are shitty, he shouldn't expect them not to be?

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I have a sexual encounter in my past that I don't remember. I was insanely drunk at a party early in the semester when I was 21 years old when I was studying overseas, and at some point I went into a bedroom with a guy and had sex. Afterwards, I passed out on the bed, and the guy who lived in that suite later helped me figure out what happened, and he got me home.

I can remember the shirt and jeans I was wearing, and I can remember his first name. And I know what he looks like better than a lot of other people I've met over the years, because his picture (along with the rest of our class, first years both in graduate and undergraduate are considered the same class there) is in my office. I can remember flashes of actually having sex. I have no memory of talking to him, and I later found out that no one else saw me with this guy. Apparently I was a mystery for months afterwards. I'm pretty sure that the guy I slept with was also ridiculously drunk. And I couldn't tell you whose idea it was for us to have sex. But it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if I was enthusiastic in my reception to the idea because I get really excited about what I think are good ideas when I'm drunk. He was either 17 or 18, a freshman, so maybe I was the aggressor. He came by the next day to find out if we needed to get a morning after pill*, which I thought was really sweet, but I started my period at some point that morning, so we were in the clear. I never really talked to him again.

It's been almost 24 years and I still go back and forth on whether there was assault, and if so, on whose part. I certainly didn't think so at the time. I felt a little guilty about it, slutty. I regretted it, but I regretted the entire situation of getting that drunk to the point of not remembering as much as I did having sex and not knowing a damned thing about it. And just not sure. Confusion was and continues to be my overwhelming feeling about it. I have no idea what he felt about it, but he did not talk about it with anyone else.** He also avoided me for the rest of our time there, and I never could tell if it was because of shame or fear. I never said anything about it to anyone, and with the exception of a comment on facebook a few days ago, this is the first time I've ever really told anyone about it. When I think about my sexual past, I don't consider him a partner in any way, shape, or form. But I suppose he was as much a part of it as anyone I was aware of having sex with.

I am pretty sure, though, in this day and age, there are a lot of people who would unconditionally call what happened at that party assault, and they'd be royally pissed about it because I would be the worst witness in the world, and worse, sympathetic to him. I had no capacity whatsoever to give consent. But I'm pretty sure he didn't either. Did we assault each other? Is my reluctance to call it assault due to a feeling of complicity in allowing myself to get that drunk? Or that I don't want to be a victim? Or have my identity include sexual assault survivor? If I had a better memory of what happened, would I have clearer feelings about it?

This is a messy, messy area, with some bright lines, but even those aren't cut and dried. There's a shit ton of stuff that is blurry, especially when alcohol is involved. And the people involved don't know each other very well. And there's a lot of conflicting emotion and hopes and expectation built in. I think our reactions to these things help unpack a little on whether or not something bad happened.

I was talking with another woman**** about babe.net story last night, and she's annoyed by it because she feels that the story infantizies the woman and robs her of agency. She also noted that she has been assaulted, and talking about whatever happened between Grace and Ansari should never be in the same conversation. Because as uncomfortable as it would have been for Grace, she could have left at any time during the encounter. The woman I was talking to could not. And neither could I.

*Such a thing was not available in the US at the time. I would avail myself upon it's availability a few weeks later in the "kinda rape" incident. Which is a lot funnier than it sounds.

**It was a VERY gossipy place, with a bathroom gossip column that came out every week. If anyone knew who I was, it would have made the gossip column. One friend guessed, and another was utterly shocked when she found out it was me because people were so not sure. Apparently, I was "a mystery."

***I don't HAVE to maintain her privacy here, but it'd be shitty not to.

A buddy of mine met a woman at a conference who told him she performed a certain sexual act on me in college. I do not recall it, and did not recognize her later photo. I believe the assumption is I was on hallucinogens st the time (not a stretch then). The girl said I was way out of my head.

I found a yearbook and asked a housemate about her. He recalled her.

I’ve no clue, but she says I enjoyed it. Seems a nice person, funny, and cute (I probably should’ve recalled it and maybe actually gotten to know her). What should I think of her? I’ve always thought it funny. Apparently, it’s not? Or is it only a joke when you’re a guy? Because you’re stronger? ...Because I kind of think she had a lot more dexterity than I did in that moment.

This Pandora’s box is a lot bigger and a lot more complicated than the analyses of this Ansari situation have suggested.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Adder

You aren't going to like this. I'm saying if George Clooney connects with someone and they "have sex" that left her feeling violated, he has zero expectation of privacy about what she felt was violating.

On your view of privacy, among other things, it's pretty much impossible to comply about government intrusions. If IRL one has so little ability to expect that other people will treat your life as private, there is no reason to think that the people should be compelled to do so when they are wearing government hats and justifying what they want to do as prudent to fight crime or defend the national security. If any private person can violate your privacy because they feel upset, it's hard to say with a straight face that the government can't for the sorts of reasons it usually has. What you conceptualize as privacy isn't really about an individual's interests so much as a generalized suspicion of certain types of government actions. You just don't seem to place any inherent value on a person's interest in being left alone.

The flaw with a lot of libertarians is that they see government action as a threat to liberty, but not private conduct. A person is oppressed by the government regulators who say he can't burn chemicals in his yard, but not by the toxic fumes from the chemicals his neighbors are burning. That's the category mistake you are making. It's too limited a view of freedom.

What makes this view of yours particularly odd is that at the very same time that you are arguing that many people's understanding of other's (sexual) autonomy is flawed and needs to change to respect individual freedoms (to be left alone) more.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

This is a messy, messy area, with some bright lines, but even those aren't cut and dried. There's a shit ton of stuff that is blurry, especially when alcohol is involved. And the people involved don't know each other very well. And there's a lot of conflicting emotion and hopes and expectation built in. I think our reactions to these things help unpack a little on whether or not something bad happened.

I agree on all points. Hell, I had to help a family member with a slightly similar situation (except the guy in her case "fed" her vodka after she was already drunk such that she ended up being so drunk that she had to be taken to the hospital). She obviously couldn't consent to sex and it seems 99% likely that he had sex with her when she was unconscious. School came to the conclusion that both parties acted irresponsibly and did nothing. Schools protect schools, not students. Everyone should know that. But I digress.

You said, you feel "a little guilty about it, slutty. I regretted it, but I regretted the entire situation of getting that drunk to the point of not remembering as much as I did having sex and not knowing a damned thing about it." We've all had experiences with alcohol that tend to be a little crazy. I once slept with a woman I had just met after we got completely drunk and a bit stoned (her weed, which made it even more tasty). She was the one who put it in. But the next day she didn't remember it AT ALL, which scared the hell out of me (no matter how drunk I get, I never forget anything that happened). She could have freaked out and said I took advantage of her. She didn't. She remembered we were wildly attracted to each other that night and she seemed to be a very decent person. We also hooked up a few more times. If I had disappeared or been dismissive, things might have been very different. And I'm in no position to tell you how you should feel about your encounter, but I hate that we have put so much meaning into sex that something like that (which may have been enjoyable to you both at the time--who knows?) ends up weighing on your mind so much. Obviously I should add that what I just said clearly does not apply if you didn't want to have sex at the time or he or you took advantage somehow.

And, because you laid it all out in your post and you told us that he never interacted with you again, I automatically have to put myself in his shoes. He probably thinks that he took advantage. And we have all been taught that there is a point at which you are so drunk no one can consent to sex. So, even if it was drunken-mutual, in the light of day, that reality may have set in. And freshman year of college isn't packed with mature guys who can sit down and have an intelligent conversation about taking responsibility, their feelings and your feelings, or what may have happened when it comes to something like this.

TM

(Hopefully nothing in this post comes off as mansplaining. I enjoy the conversation and I cannot avoid giving opinions, because that's what makes for good conversation in my book. If any of it does, it surely isn't my intention.)

[greatwhitenorthchick]

To further flog this poor horse, I give you Samantha Bee's take. Perhaps she is saying what Adder is trying to say (I don't know anymore):

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/sama...oo-1202668268/

Apologies if this has already been discussed.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I agree on all points. Hell, I had to help a family member with a slightly similar situation (except the guy in her case "fed" her vodka after she was already drunk such that she ended up being so drunk that she had to be taken to the hospital). She obviously couldn't consent to sex and it seems 99% likely that he had sex with her when she was unconscious. School came to the conclusion that both parties acted irresponsibly and did nothing. Schools protect schools, not students. Everyone should know that. But I digress.

You said, you feel "a little guilty about it, slutty. I regretted it, but I regretted the entire situation of getting that drunk to the point of not remembering as much as I did having sex and not knowing a damned thing about it." We've all had experiences with alcohol that tend to be a little crazy. I once slept with a woman I had just met after we got completely drunk and a bit stoned (her weed, which made it even more tasty). She was the one who put it in. But the next day she didn't remember it AT ALL, which scared the hell out of me (no matter how drunk I get, I never forget anything that happened). She could have freaked out and said I took advantage of her. She didn't. She remembered we were wildly attracted to each other that night and she seemed to be a very decent person. We also hooked up a few more times. If I had disappeared or been dismissive, things might have been very different. And I'm in no position to tell you how you should feel about your encounter, but I hate that we have put so much meaning into sex that something like that (which may have been enjoyable to you both at the time--who knows?) ends up weighing on your mind so much. Obviously I should add that what I just said clearly does not apply if you didn't want to have sex at the time or he or you took advantage somehow.

And, because you laid it all out in your post and you told us that he never interacted with you again, I automatically have to put myself in his shoes. He probably thinks that he took advantage. And we have all been taught that there is a point at which you are so drunk no one can consent to sex. So, even if it was drunken-mutual, in the light of day, that reality may have set in. And freshman year of college isn't packed with mature guys who can sit down and have an intelligent conversation about taking responsibility, their feelings and your feelings, or what may have happened when it comes to something like this.

TM

(Hopefully nothing in this post comes off as mansplaining. I enjoy the conversation and I cannot avoid giving opinions, because that's what makes for good conversation in my book. If any of it does, it surely isn't my intention.)

No worries. I wouldn't have put it out there just to sit there. I think it's probably a fairly common scenario, and I think everyone handles it a little differently, which makes it that much more complicated.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by greatwhitenorthchick

To further flog this poor horse, I give you Samantha Bee's take. Perhaps she is saying what Adder is trying to say (I don't know anymore):

http://variety.com/2018/tv/news/sama...oo-1202668268/

Apologies if this has already been discussed.

I love Samantha Bee and I don't think I've ever disagreed with her.

What bothers me so much about this specific example is that it is so very one-sided. I hate that Ansari hasn't recounted the night from his perspective. He would be crazy to do it, but I think in a case like this (where it is being used to have real and sincere conversations about important issues), it would be nice if we could have a fuller view of what happened.

So what happens with the eggshell "plaintiff?" And to be sure, I'm not labeling Grace as such. But if some woman thought she was sending clear signals, but then actively kissed and touched the other person, received and gave oral sex, and felt like it was a terrible awful experience, wasn't respected, was coerced, and ended up going public, is the fact that--in my hypothetical--her perspective is the only one that is given credence or exposure problematic? Obviously this is a tortured and unrealistic hypo, but if we had Ansari's full perspective, would some of what Grace said be given the side-eye?

Hell, one GA kissed me full on the lips at a GA meet-up.* And she tried it two more times. I sure as hell wasn't hitting on her. But she told more than a few people that I kissed her. And we all know patentpara accused me of hitting on her and making her feel uncomfortable because she was angry. If I hadn't said anything in either case, what would Samantha Bee be saying about those women? What would she be saying about me?**

TM

*No, not paigow.

**I hate this shit. Given how little attention harassment stories have received and how little support victims have received historically, and how unlikely it is that anyone who had a terrible sexual experience would come forward for no reason, it makes me ill to be bringing this stupid shit up like I'm some white dude complaining about reverse discrimination. But here I am doing it anyway. Damn it. Can I blame Canada?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

People have been wondering why the Navy doctor who examined Trump (and Obama before him) was so effusive about Trump's health, and have seen it as another small step in the disintegration of the republic. My theory: The doctor wants Trump to be able to confide in him when and if POTUS has a medical issue, and was just doing what he could to establish a trusting doctor-patient relationship. While the public has a legit right to know at least something about POTUS's health, maybe the doctor sees that as less important than making sure that POTUS gets the care he needs.