A quick update on Republican candidate for the US Senate from Alabama Roy Moore: a fifth, very credible, victim has come forward, claiming that Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 16 and waitressing at a diner Moore frequented. Her press conference is worth watching but is completely heartbreaking.

Meanwhile, people who knew Moore "back in the day" have made statements to the effect that everyone knew he went after young girls and it was thought of as a little creepy. Moore was banned from the local shopping mall because he used to pester high school girls around the food court.

His poll numbers are dropping, despite 50 Alabama Pastors signing a statement in support of him and Fox News viewers smashing their Keurig's (seriously, this is a thing) and he's now running behind the Democrat - a former District Attorney who - amongst other achievements - successfully prosecuted, some 40 years after the fact, Klan members who blew up a church killing 4 young girls between the ages of 11 and 14. Honestly, the contrast is that stark.

Coincidentally, the Republican establishment has (finally) jumped ship - Mitch McConnell yesterday saying that "I believe those women" and that he thinks Moore should step down. In the meantime, Alabama law means that there's no way now to remove Moore's name from the ballot, so the party is scrambling to figure out how to stop Jeff Sessions' old, safe Senate seat from going to a Democrat and further shrinking their thin Senate majority.

Election day is December 12.

Edited by Ray in Houston (14 Nov 2017 3.51pm)

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

This has been exposed as fake & these people are denying they've even signed it claiming it's actually a possible forgery. So goes from bad to worse. He'll be gone within 48 hours...

Pro USA & Israel

Technically? Sorry, but here you are again inventing redefinitions.

Errr....'male privilege'? Please inform me about my 'male privilege'...it would be great to hear it from you. From the heights of your moral perch up there on Mount Misandry.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

The technicality being the harm done. Someone persistently hitting on someone who is not interested is an annoyance. Someone with power over a person - either physically or professionally - and persistently hitting on them is far more damaging and thus far more serious.

Your cloud of male privilege being the thing that is stopping you from seeing the difference between these two very different situations. Thankfully, for clarification for people confused about this such as yourself, there are laws to protect people from the latter.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

I think we all agree that sexual harrassment happens, that's its more extreme forms are commonly carried out by men, though by no means exclusively so and that action proportionate to the offence is appropriate.

I'm concerned that the societal hyperbole is moving into territory where 'making a pass' is now sexual harassment. I'd always considered that it became harassment if it were out of the blue, or when you continued once you were rejected or asked to stop.

There needs to be common sense applied to, what is in most cases, normal everyday interactions between people.

Modern politicians are zeitgeist whores latching onto the latest cultural trends shouted out by activist minorities.....who if the media ignored wouldn't have influence because their ideas are in the cloud cuckoo lands inevitably inhabited by those who believe in utopias.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Weinstein, Louis CK, Moore, Spacey and - by his own words - Trump are not being hounded for making a pass out of the blue or not initially taking "no" for an answer. They forced themselves on people sexually.

This is the problem with the male privilege that you so consistently express: allowing people the option of saying "no" without any further blowback is not taking anything away from you. As I have said before, if someone achieving equality (in this case the ability to go to the pub and be left the f*** alone if that's their choice) makes you think that you're losing something, that's the definition of privilege.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.