The Billy Graham Rule!

These days nobody is going to jail for rape without DNA or some other evidence you don't get from a car ride, silly!

Or being out to dinner w a girl.

Or being at a happy hour without your wife.
 
It's about being above reproach. I have followed this rule when I was single and continue now that I'm married. I am uncomfortable when put in a situation where this is compromised.

I started teaching when I was 21. I have never been in a room alone with a female student...and that is on purpose. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

I have never traveled exclusively with female teachers to meetings or events. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

By them I'm talking about any who would accuse you. I approached it from not only protecting my career (young teachers get themselves into trouble often...many on their own doing and others because of the appearance of impropriety) but also because I preach. On the couple of occasions I have counseled women from church I made sure that there was another present.

Above reproach....don't give anyone ammunition against you. It's been my motto as well. Not weak. Smart for someone under public scrutiny.
 
Jarod said:
These days nobody is going to jail for rape without DNA or some other evidence you don't get from a car ride, silly!

Or being out to dinner w a girl.

Or being at a happy hour without your wife.
Click to expand...

Brian Banks says hi
 
leaningright said:
It's about being above reproach. I have followed this rule when I was single and continue now that I'm married. I am uncomfortable when put in a situation where this is compromised.

I started teaching when I was 21. I have never been in a room alone with a female student...and that is on purpose. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

I have never traveled exclusively with female teachers to meetings or events. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

By them I'm talking about any who would accuse you. I approached it from not only protecting my career (young teachers get themselves into trouble often...many on their own doing and others because of the appearance of impropriety) but also because I preach. On the couple of occasions I have counseled women from church I made sure that there was another present.

Above reproach....don't give anyone ammunition against you. It's been my motto as well. Not weak. Smart for someone under public scrutiny.
Click to expand...

Jarod's trying to be an internet warrior tough guy.
 
Jarod said:
The so called Billy Graham rule has seen some attention lately in that the VP says he follows it.

Mike Pence refuses to ride in a car, or eat a meal with any single women unless his wife is present.

He also refuses to go to any event where alcoholic beverages are served unless his wife is in attendance.


What are your thoughts about that? What if the best qualified candidate for Chief of Staff was a woman? What if he needed to be briefed on the way to an important meeting and the most knowledgeable person was a woman?

Why cant he trust himself alone with a woman?


My assistant is a woman, we work, eat and even travel together... never once has an inappropriate thing happened.
Click to expand...

It's a good rule of thumb, especially for men in prominent, highly visible positions. The decision is between a husband and his wife.
 
leaningright said:
It's about not putting yourself in a position where you can be accused of something inappropriate. Its about being open with his wife (and others) about his interactions with other women. It's not a matter of not being able to "trust himself with a woman."

Don't you just love how people like to try to make the best guy in this administration (I know, my opinion) into something he isn't.
Click to expand...
Well we part there. I know Mike Pence and he's an insufferable prick of the highest order. I don't know how many times I've heard that jack ass MANSPLAIN things to women who were significantly better educated and more professionally accomplished than he is. I find the thought of a reactionary throw back to the 19th century with his anti-intellectual and anti-science rhetoric and his utter cluelessness of the real world, outside of rural Indiana, and being one step away from the Presidency far more of a frightening thought than Trump. Trump may be an unpredictable neophyte in government but I'll take that chosen purgatory over Mike Pence's obligatory right wing 19th century paradise any day. In fact the primary reason that I will vote against Donald Trump in 2020 is to do my part that an extremist like Mike Pence is kept away from the halls of power.

Personally Pence's actions are not about being open with ones spouse. It's about not placing oneself in a situation with the appearance of impropriety. That's not about trust. In fact it's the exact opposite. It's about placing yourself in a position where trust isn't called into question. Nothing wrong with that per se but don't tell me that's about building trust. That's about protecting ones reputation.
 
cawacko said:
People have all different kinds of arangements/agreements in their marriage. At the end of the day it's up to them. They've been married 30 or 40 years while half of married folk get divorced. I don't find that dumb or weak even if it's not something i would do
Click to expand...
I agree....just don't try and tell me it's about "trust". It's not.
 
cawacko said:
Funny how guy's go to jail because a woman falsely accuses them of rape but hey it's pitiful for a guy to be concerned.
Click to expand...

I hear this a lot about false rape accusations. What proof do men accept that a rape actually did occur? Even if there's DNA evidence guys will say it was consensual, not rape.
 
christiefan915 said:
I hear this a lot about false rape accusations. What proof do men accept that a rape actually did occur? Even if there's DNA evidence guys will say it was consensual, not rape.
Click to expand...

Look up the Brian Banks case. Jarod thinks a man has no responsibility for the situation they put themselves in. That's ignorant.
 
leaningright said:
It's about being above reproach. I have followed this rule when I was single and continue now that I'm married. I am uncomfortable when put in a situation where this is compromised.

I started teaching when I was 21. I have never been in a room alone with a female student...and that is on purpose. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

I have never traveled exclusively with female teachers to meetings or events. Give them nothing to accuse you of.

By them I'm talking about any who would accuse you. I approached it from not only protecting my career (young teachers get themselves into trouble often...many on their own doing and others because of the appearance of impropriety) but also because I preach. On the couple of occasions I have counseled women from church I made sure that there was another present.

Above reproach....don't give anyone ammunition against you. It's been my motto as well. Not weak. Smart for someone under public scrutiny.
Click to expand...
Well that's fine and that's your choice but I have found that if you keep your character and your actions above reproach you have little to worry about. Those sort of actions are about protecting ones reputation. They are not about trust or building trust.

To use other examples, would you not get in a car with a single male on the basis that he may be gay? Would you get into a car with a Rabbi on the basis or his religion? How about getting into a car with a person of a different race or culture? See where I'm going with this?

I believe the only way I can protect my reputation is through my own personal character and actions and if my own character and behavior are beyond reproach, and I know it, then I don't give one damn what anyone else thinks. I know what the truth is.

For example. My wife will go out with co-workers on occasion to have a few drinks and talk shop. Several of those are single males. I have never once opposed my wife going out with them as, #1. I trust her implicitly and #2. I know her character. I don't need any more than that.
 
cawacko said:
Look up the Brian Banks case. Jarod thinks a man has no responsibility for the situation they put themselves in. That's ignorant.
Click to expand...

I don't get that out of his comments but my question is different. I looked up Banks and yes, there was injustice, and he's not the only one who was unjustly accused.

You read all the rape threads here, as I do. Too many times posters immediately bring up false accusation.

So what proof do men accept that a rape actually occurred, where they don't automatically play the "consensual" card?
 
christiefan915 said:
I don't get that out of his comments but my question is different. I looked up Banks and yes, there was injustice, and he's not the only one who was unjustly accused.

You read all the rape threads here, as I do. Too many times posters immediately bring up false accusation.

So what proof do men accept that a rape actually occurred, where they don't automatically play the "consensual" card?
Click to expand...

It's exactly what he's saying and Brian Banks is the perfect example of why men need to watch what positions they put themselves in.
 
cawacko said:
It's exactly what he's saying and Brian Banks is the perfect example of why men need to watch what positions they put themselves in.
Click to expand...

That standard applies to women also. How many times do we have people saying a woman was raped because of her provocative clothing or language, or getting drunk, or not being careful about her surroundings.

What proof do men need to accept that a rape actually occurred?
 
leaningright said:
It's about not putting yourself in a position where you can be accused of something inappropriate. Its about being open with his wife (and others) about his interactions with other women. It's not a matter of not being able to "trust himself with a woman."

Don't you just love how people like to try to make the best guy in this administration (I know, my opinion) into something he isn't.
Click to expand...

The optics suck and the substance sucks. We don't care what it's about FOR HIM, it is a clear signal that woman are sexual objects just the same as the motivation behind making women wear sheets with slits for eyes in the blazing heat.

I wonder, is this man a conservative Christian? Guess what, he is. He needs therapy. It should include whips and pain infliction by someone in sensible shoes.
 
christiefan915 said:
That standard applies to women also. How many times do we have people saying a woman was raped because of her provocative clothing or language, or getting drunk, or not being careful about her surroundings.

What proof do men need to accept that a rape actually occurred?
Click to expand...

you're on a whole other topic. Clearly rapes occur. I'm speaking to Jarod's comments about men's behavior and the potential repercussions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top