heywood on 17/1/2018 at 00:24
I will agree that piling on stories of bad one night stands tends to water down the movement that started with Weinstein.
heywood on 17/1/2018 at 00:38
Quote Posted by icemann
The catch 22 to that, is how does the accused prove that he/she did
not do it if accused wrongly?
Answer: They can't. So people will just make their own minds up, whether the person was innocent or not.
Don't get hung up on proof and don't assume there is a black or white decision to be made between two polar opposites: the accusation is true and the accused is guilty vs. the accusation is false and the accused is innocent. The truth isn't knowable and is probably somewhere in between. Nevertheless, there is a spectrum of actions that can be taken based on the amount of information available, how damning (or not) the information is, and how trustworthy the sources are.
Obviously, every case is different and people ought to take multiple factors into account when determining whether to do something and what. If we're talking about a single incident of harassment, denied by the accused, where there is no evidence or witnesses to help corroborate the accuser's story, and both parties don't have any prior history, we're more likely to file the information away for future reference than take action on it. That's how most of the corporate world here would handle it. You might separate the parties, especially if its a manager/subordinate relationship. But then HR would just keep a record of it in case something like it comes up again. On the other hand, if the accused has a prior history, we will probably give more consideration to the accuser's story, and maybe take some disciplinary action. What kind of action would depend on how much prior history, how serious was the harassment, etc. I think most organizations have reasonable policies for handling complaints. Obviously not all do, and when a pattern of problem behavior isn't being dealt with internally, that's when it ends up in public.
One other point:
Choosing not to believe either side is de facto the same as choosing to believe the accused. You can split hairs and say that there is a difference between not believing that something happened and believing that nothing happened, but the outcome is the same.
Starker on 17/1/2018 at 01:35
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
You replied with the video when I said consent is a tricky topic. Your reply suggested there is no trickiness and that it's all very simple and straightforward. That could be read as saying that I'm trying to manufacture grey areas or ambiguity where none exist. I disagree. I think consent is very fluid and ambiguous, based on both my personal experiences and observations in public and personal life.
I did not mean to imply that there is no trickiness or no gray areas at all, but yes, I do think it's a lot simpler and straightforward than people make it out to be. You paint it as this complex web of negotiations and uncertainty, but that's normal communication, as far as I'm concerned. If you have doubts, of course you should make sure if your partner is okay with what you're doing. If your partner is sending mixed signals, that itself is a sign to pay attention.
Also, of course the onus it not solely on men, especially if we talk about a relationship of equals, but this doesn't mean men are cleared of any responsibility. When you quote the above article, it makes it seem as if this was solely women's responsibility, as if it was her fault the things happened the way they did. Isn't that going too far in the territory of victim-blaming though? She should have done this, she should have done that. Isn't
that continuing to put the male as the sexual aggressor and the female as the sexual gatekeeper?
Here's yet another article that talks about the issue:
Quote:
(
https://www.vox.com/identities/2018/1/16/16894722/aziz-ansari-grace-babe-me-too)
Unlike many reports that have emerged in the wake of revelations about Harvey Weinstein, Grace’s story is not one of workplace harassment. But what she describes — a man repeatedly pushing sex without noticing (or without caring about) what she wants — is something many, many women have experienced in encounters with men. And while few men have committed the litany of misdeeds of which Weinstein has been accused, countless men have likely behaved as Grace says Ansari did — focusing on their own desires without recognizing what their partner wants. It is the sheer commonness of Grace’s experience that makes it so important to talk about.
[...]
Despite a growing conversation around enthusiastic consent, most everything in American culture still tells men that they should be pushing for as much sex as possible at all times. The idea that men have more sexual desire than women still goes unchallenged, leading too many men to believe that a lukewarm yes is all they’re ever going to get, because women don’t like sex that much anyway. Boys learn at a young age, from pop culture, their elders, and their peers, that it’s normal to have to convince a woman to have sex, and that repeated small violations of her boundaries are an acceptable way to do so — perhaps even the only way.
[...]
Meanwhile, girls learn from an early age that it is rude to reject boys. They learn to “let them down easily” and never humiliate them. They learn to give other people what they want, and to put their own desires second — especially when it comes to sex. And few girls get any sex education, either at school or from the culture they consume, that encourages them to think about sex in terms of what they actually desire, as opposed to how they will be perceived by others.
[...]
The result is that situations like the one Grace describes, in which a man keeps pushing and a woman, though uncomfortable, doesn’t immediately leave, happen all the time. For all the criticism Grace’s story received from Flanagan and others, it also received countless nods of recognition on social media, from women and men. Too many people saw something familiar in the story of a man who badgers a woman for sex, again and again, as though hoping to wear down her resistance.
[...]
Perhaps what is especially threatening about Grace's story is that it involves a situation in which many men can imagine themselves. But this is a reason to discuss it more, not to sweep it under the rug. Listening to Grace doesn't mean deciding all men should go to prison, or should lose their jobs. It does mean admitting that many men behave in exactly the ways their culture tells them to behave. It means asking men to recognize that and do better, and it means changing the culture so that badgering and pressuring women into sex is deplored, not endorsed. None of this will happen if we refuse to reckon with stories like Grace's.
Right now, many people in America are afraid of women talking. But talking is exactly what we need.
Starker on 17/1/2018 at 01:55
A rebuttal to the Merkin article:
Quote:
(
https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/1/6/16855434/weinstein-reckoning-sexual-harassment-due-process-daphne-merkin-keillor-franken)
On Friday, the New York Times published an op-ed by the writer Daphne Merkin mourning the death of due process as a result of the post-Weinstein reckoning.
“The fact that such unwelcome advances persist, and often in the office, is, yes, evidence of sexism and the abusive power of the patriarchy,” she wrote. “But I don't believe that scattershot, life-destroying denunciations are the way to upend it. In our current climate, to be accused is to be convicted. Due process is nowhere to be found.”
That's an interesting statement, given almost none of the powerful men accused of sexual violence over the course of the past year have been charged with a crime, let alone convicted.
[...]
So what has happened to the four men who Merkin specifically holds up as unjustly convicted without due process, these innocent souls sacrificed to the Reckoning?
They've lost their jobs. Three of them were fired following formal investigations into their behavior; Franken, whose former office does not have a reasonably functioning investigatory arm, voluntarily left following eight separate accusations. While the Keillor, Schwartz, and Lizza investigations may not have been up to the standards of a criminal court, they also didn't carry the same type of consequences as a criminal court, and as such they required a lower burden of proof.
None of these men have been convicted of any crimes. None of them have even been charged with any crimes.
But what about the other men affected, the ones Merkin labels as “the heinous sorts”? The ones who face multiple, detailed accusations of rape and sexual assault, with witnesses and corroborating evidence to spare?
A few of them have charges pending against them. Fewer of them have been arrested. None of them have been convicted.
And in the past, when these kinds of powerful men were accused of sexual violence and made it all the way to trial, almost none of them received jail sentences.
Given these facts, is it really the accused men of the Reckoning who have not had due process? Or is it their victims?
Kolya on 17/1/2018 at 02:10
We get it heywood, you will rather believe the wrong side than none. And act on that belief.
How did the various tiers of law systems that you described fail "Grace" before she decided to publish her story on babe.com?
It seems to me she went straight to the court of public opinion. Why would she do that?
Is it because the legal system is biased to disadvantage victim's of sexual harassment?
Or is it because she thought she could deal more damage more easily to Aziz Ansari that way?
And who are the people who enforce that kind of damage, the societal ousting of an actor whose only currency is popularity?
Are they people who reserve the right to judge when those other tiers of the law have failed?
Or are they just a bit too proud of themselves and their free opinion to admit that they don't have the necessary information and therefore base their opinion on pre-existing views and stereotypes?
Renzatic on 17/1/2018 at 02:57
I'll sum up my views on the entire matter as such:
#Metoo is necessary. There are too many people who have gotten away with far too much due to their position, enabled by the willingness of others to keep things quiet for the sake of saving face.
#Metoo will at some point become twisted and abused by overzealous people, as all social initiatives that start on the internet tend to do.
I don't think we've quite reached the inevitable conclusion just yet, but I'm already starting to see evidence of its coming.
Tocky on 17/1/2018 at 03:50
I think #Metoo already got twisted by Babe.com when it did not make Aziz also anonymous. Rather than a helpful story of how to avoid dating pitfalls from both perspectives it really did try to damage a celebrity for his behavior though we only heard one side and don't know the other. That should in no way invalidate #Metoo. It invalidates Babe.com to an extent.
One thing I liked about Scots linked article is how it mentioned empathy. Obviously neither party had that in the Aziz story. They were looking at each other not as people but what they could get out of each other. He wanted a one night stand and has likely had that many times because of his celebrity and was expecting it this time. She wanted a celebrity boyfriend for social position. She dumped her regular guy as per ladder theory to do so.
Neither side was with the other because they truly liked the other. Maybe she was hoping they would to assuage her conscience in ladder climbing venality. I'll give her that much. Her petty behavior over wine and vindictiveness makes me doubt she had the ability to but I don't know her whole life.
There are times I'm actually glad I'm not rich or famous or good looking. That way at least I knew they were out with me because they liked me. Well, I mean I'm not ugly exactly, but you know what I mean. Empathy counts.
Vasquez on 17/1/2018 at 09:00
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
So there are a heap of ifs or buts in there to manage consent all the way through a sexual interaction -
which is entirely my point.
And my point is that we have this handy thing called language and words. Use them whenever you're uncertain what's going on.
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
To take a polarised viewpoint, if we are saying women have no agency in a situation like the one with Aziz, are we to accept the idea that every woman who has had a regrettable sexual encounter did so because if she said no then she would have been raped or murdered?
No, but in reality you can't always know when that can happen. Men
are the aggressors in the sense they (on average) have more physical power. If you've never been in a situation that suddenly shifts from kissing and cuddling to something a bit ominous and you have to try to interpret what just happened and where can this go, and then hope he's not the kind of person who explodes if he's rejected, and then gather courage to end the whole thing... well, you just can't know what it's like.
I don't have issues with my sexuality, in that area I'm rather self-assured, but I can tell you that doesn't help at all if there's a nasty turn in the situation. Of course you have to say ''no'' if you feel you're forced or rushed in a threatening way, but knowing you are allowed to say no doesn't automatically make you feel safe. And, sometimes, might turn out you are not safe. Even people you've known [as friends] for a long time can show an entirely new side of themselves.
Quote Posted by Scots Taffer
Take my example from a few pages back of the chick at the festival with her tits out. What's right and what's wrong?
To me it's obvious that you don't grab anyone even though they're semi- or altogether nude. I think the whole mystification of the body is silly, and I think naturism is a wonderful movement.
But at the same time, of course, I know there are loads of people who think the opposite, exposing a part of your body is an open invitation to anyone to come and grab. Ie the hicks and idiots ;)
icemann on 17/1/2018 at 09:21
Yup nothings a mood killer like checking each step of the way for verbal consent and not going by body language.