Apparently none of that matters.
Because, as I quoted in my O.P., this was “Robin Fucking Williams”.
Who apparently could do no wrong. And who was exempt from any workplace norms.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Such men might also glom on to Dawber as an example of how women should be (or how they used to be back in the good ole days of pre-PCness). She’s not uptight, she’s down for a good time, and she won’t run to HR the minute you put the moves on her. In their eyes, Williams’ reported behavior is within the realm of normal guy behavior. They don’t see it as harassment at all.
Right. It’s not possibly because we women don’t like being treated like delicate little flowers who can’t possibly be expected to know our own minds, and must have the big strong menfolk protect us. :rolleyes:
Fuck off.
Snipping mine.
Then when we hear from someone who WAS offended or bothered by it, we can have the discussion.
Cite that he violated them? Anyone else come forward with stories of Robin Williams Hijinks? Extrapolating from one person’s story in order to condemn another without ANY actual evidence is pretty much the definition of a witchhunt.
Should more come forward? Sure, fuck 'im. But I won’t give him the Franken treatment without someone actually offended by his actions.
Alternatively, folks talking about his reported actions could stop insisting he did nothing wrong just because Dawber’s is the only published opinion out there. Unless someone personally knows everyone whom he flashed, groped, or grabbed, then the safest judgement is a measured one. We don’t know what Robin Williams was capable of. It’s still possible to respect him as a comedian and acknowledge this uncertainty.
If a friend told me that their parents used to tease them about their weight and smack them in the face from time to time, but they said this treatment wasn’t a big deal, would I insist on telling them they were abused? Nope. But would I let my friend’s opinion keep me from judging that type of parenting as wrong? Nope, because that’s not how it works for me. If my friend had siblings who were treated similarly, I would also consider the possibility that they might view their experiences differently than my friend does. I would’t necessarily need to hear their perspective to refrain from taking my friend’s assessment as the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
As is frequently the case in threads, things move pretty far afield of the O.P.
I called out DrDeth for one narrow reason- giving Robin Williams a pass when others are not being given a pass. For being blindly star-struck.
Not because I’m some bizarre Internet White Knight who gets to tell women what they are allowed to think or feel.
Nobody else has come forward? Does that 100% discount Pam Dawber’s story because there are not dozens of victims? You’re calling a sole victim stating abuse the definition of a witch hunt.
Okay. Your nine year old daughter comes home and in sickening detail inform you and your spouse of exactly what the teacher has been doing to her for the last few weeks.
A) You call her a liar for making up bad bad dirty stories about that nice teacher. After all, she’s the only student who ever has said these things.
B) You trust your child enough to investigate.
Wouldn’t want to go starting any witch hunts there, would you? I guess you’re firmly in the camp of choice “A”, then?
The pathological compulsion to disbelieve the statements of a sexual abuse victim say volumes about the denier and exactly nothing about the victim. You see Pam Dawber’s sole statements as a Witch Hunt. That sure does speak volumes.
Snipped out the bullshit emotional appeal.
Pam Dawber has specifically stated what happened WAS NOT ABUSE. Do you know who defines abuse? The victim. Not you. You don’t get to say, “Robin Williams is an abuser” based on one person that has said, “He didn’t abuse me.”
I never even IMPLIED Pam Dawber’s statement to be a witch hunt. I said you’re expansion of her words - taken completely out of context - is a witch hunt. Don’t act like you’re defending her, you’re simply using her story to further your own opinion.
Like I said, should other stories come out about Williams from women that were upset by it, we can revisit the topic. Taking someone saying, “I wasn’t abused” and saying, “He’s abusive!” is utter horseshit and no longer worth the time to respond to. Coincidentally, you can fuck off with your ridiculously false equivalence of a child’s description of abuse compared to a grown woman stating, “This happened, I wasn’t bothered.” That’s the kind of shit I expect from Shodan.
Isn’t that exactly what you’re doing? You keep ignoring what the “victim” has said about her own experience, insisting she really was abused and felt compelled to lie about it, rather than take her at her word that she thought it was a fun time. This is a grown woman talking about events from her past, not a child.
There was no victim here. Pam Dawber was not the “victim of abuse,” and did not “state abuse.” Based on the only evidence we have - her own story - she was the recipient of consensual and welcomed sexually charged flirting. This is not abuse. Extrapolating from this to sexual harassment - which is definitionally nonconsensual - is a failure of logic. I have engaged in mutually consensual sexually charged flirting; it’s been going on, with the same girl, for almost twenty years now. Am I therefore more likely to have engaged in sexual harassment? Is my wife?
Obviously “B,” because what she’s alleging is illegal and immoral on its face. It has absolutely nothing to do with this story. The proper hypothetical would go like this:
"Your 24-year-old daughter comes home from her first six months on a new job and tells you in passing about a goofy, flirty co-worker whose company she really enjoys. Do you:
A) Do nothing, because nothing of what I just described is inherently problematic; or
B) Assume that her co-worker is definitely doing the same thing to other women who do not enjoy it?"
One person involved in this exchange is disbelieving Pam Dawber, who has said (not explicitly, but implicitly) that she was not a sexual abuse victim. Why don’t you believe her?. Is it your contention that no woman, by definition, could ever enjoy the sort of behavior being described?
You do realize ( or perhaps you don’t ) that this country is filled with women andmen who are abused and cannot say to others that they were abused, right?
You just said that the person who defines abuse is the abused? Wrong, sweetiepie. It’s the laws in the relevant jurisdiction. As it turns out, victims who are incapable of saying they were sexually abused aren’t being Bold Feminists Who Can Speak Up Without The Need Of An Internet White Knight.
They’re just scared silent.
It’s not my place either of course. It’s the law’s place.
And what he did by putting his hands on her body was illegal. You may not like it, but it was. And is.
Sure. Pam Dawber might be one of those women. But we have no evidence that she is.
This is wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, hilariously, overwhelmingly wrong. I defy you to find a law that says that “putting your hands on someone’s body” is in and of itself illegal in any state. There are of course laws against “putting your hands on someone’s body without their consent,” but there is no evidence of any kind that this happened here.
Look, it’s fine. You don’t believe Pam Dawber. That is your right. I don’t understand, exactly, why you don’t believe her. Why do you assume that hers is one of the cases where she is “scared silent” (in spite of the fact that her putative abuser is dead and if she was scared silent, she could just as easily have not mentioned the events at all)?
But whatever the reason, you don’t believe Pam Dawber. And therefore you absolutely do NOT get to claim the moral high ground of “I believe women,” because you’re not listening to the actual woman in this case - you’re substituting your own judgment for hers.
Jesus, can you even breathe on that high horse? You keep saying you’re not White Knighting, but I haven’t heard such unadulerated bullshit from a sanctimonious fuckwit since Bricker kept chanting BORK BORK BORK BORK BORK!
Sweetiepie? Seriously? How about you try less condescension and more comprehension. We’re not talking about a court of law, unless you’re aiming to have charges filed against Williams. This is the court of public opinion, and you should probably be disbarred.
And that’s a horrible thing. But I refuse to condemn someone based on silence.
If you’re gonna start talking law, then you’re vastly in over your head. You might want to provide a cite for that heated mountain of excrement, too.
–snip–
Exactly.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Huh…so you agree we shouldn’t be crucifying Robin Williams based on Pam Dawber’s story?
If I understanding the op’s position correctly silence and denial of having been touched in a manner that was unwanted and unwelcome is exactly what we should expect from a harassed woman and therefore silence or denial by her is evidence of harassment. (The logic of which proves that Bill Clinton sexually abused his daughter, and that Cartooniverse is a serial rapist, as well.)
Williams’ behavior was inappropriate. Not to Dawber, because it was not unwelcome or objectionable to her (and she is not a nine year old, nor was even at the time at a power disadvantage to her friend and co-star). And her belief that he probably behaved similarly to others without having witnessed or even having heard of any specific circumstance is not actual evidence that he did or if he did whether or not there it was or was not welcome by the person. It was inappropriate, at least to today’s standards, only to potential others who had no say about having to witness the two (new) stars lewd play.
Again though context matters some. The context was an often off-color and quite manic high energy comic working in a working comedy environment of the '70s and likely most working there (males and females alike) at that time were nonplussed to amused. Probably none working in that environment at that time were shocked by his lewd humor and the two stars crass mutual play. “Workplace norms” of the time and sort of work being what they were.
No, no one in our society is giving the dead poet Williams a pass … we are just not submitting into evidence what somebody’s imagination creates must actually have happened (as apparently proven by the lack of accusations and the one individual saying that it was so much fun …).
I think one could argue that it was unprofessional and inappropriate in the workplace. Harassment and assault? No.
Literally nobody cares about your phone, jackass.
Nobody cares about your opinion, jackass.
Likewise.
Actually, a lot of people care about running_coach’s opinion, since he’s not an idiot asshole. Nobody cares about your opinion, because you are.