#MeToo backlash is hurting women (Bloomberg article)

Great Debates
361

For some mysterious reason, people are very concerned about their reputation, and not terribly happy to be considered rapists. Why do they care so much about it, really? :rolleyes:

Besides it’s not true that it’s only your reputation that is at stake. Let’s assume you “believe women” and as a result assume that M. Jones is a rapist since he has been accused. You’ll keep inviting a rapist at your birthday party? You’ll hire a rapist in your business? You’ll patronize the shop of a rapist? You’ll date a rapist? Because if you don’t do these things, M. Jones will soon be an unemployed and shunned homeless man. In the past a person in this situation could move to the next town. Nowadays, with someone history at the tip of everybody’s fingertip, any woman he envisions to date, any job he applies to, any landowner he’s visiting the house of will see “rapist”. You think he’ll have a lot of relationship and professional prospects? You think that currently a man branded a rapist has bright prospects?

But that’s exactly what you’re advocating. You want the general public to use a very low bar to determine guilt with a mere accusation being sufficient. If everybody was following this view, that’s exactly what would happen : in no time, this man would have no relationship, no job, no house, no family, no friend. Lacking a criminal sentence you want a sentence of ostracisation. You won’t get him behind bars but at least you’ll reduce him to a state of destitution and misery. All the while pretending that believing a rape accusation is almost consequence-free for the accused. Fortunately, there are still people who refuse to apply this low bar, realize that the consequences of such an accusation are devastating, and reject the idea that “social lynching” on the flimsiest basis is acceptable. Otherwise, if everybody was thinking like you, any man accused could as well shot himself immediately, it would be a vastly preferable fate.

362

Or maybe it’s because there aren’t tons of people arguing on this board, all over the internet, in the media, etc… that accusations of theft in the workplace, pilfering and trade secret selling should just all be believed on principle, while it’s exactly what people are advocating with regard to sexual harassment?

Just a guess…
Of course, it’s more pleasant to assume the worst about other people, so that you’ll be able to think that you’re a bright light in an ocean of ignorant misogyny. I understand that.

363

Go pat yourself on the back.

364

Ok lets just say you have a good male friend who’s a big owner or manager of a company and he confides in you that he is reluctant to hire young, attractive women to certain jobs because of this. What would you tell him?

What if he has had a bad experience with this issue personally?

365

And you’re not getting that people don’t agree that this kind of work environment is satisfying? You and others have basically told us that people shouldn’t be friendly, should refrain from personal chit-chat, shouldn’t compliment each other…should solely talk about work-related stuff was said at least one. Having a work environment that is icy cold like that, essentially alienating and even inhuman (because socializing is what actual humans do) isn’t something that many want, even though there’s more and more of a push towards making us into such mindless drones.

It so happens that I’ve precisely be complimented on my shirt by a female coworker yesterday. I shared today my personal issues with another. I asked a third one for news about two others who have left, and probably many other things that don’t pop up in my mind at the moment. With one exception for a guy who’s very private, and another that I haven’t been working with for long, I know quite a lot about the life, joys and struggles of my coworkers. We commiserate with each other and rant to each other. I (and I’m pretty sure all my coworkers) have absolutely no desire to work in the kind of environment you promote as being the only one that is acceptably professional.

366

That he’s breaking employment law and could be subject to a lawsuit. And that he’s punishing people for his own failings. And that he’s a bit of a jerk.

367

As a man, I’m not sure you’re qualified to speak about whether compliments towards women would be okay. Most men will eagerly accept compliments from women because:

  1. They receive them so rarely
  2. They greatly enjoy attention from women

But for a woman, it’s not unusual to have several men make comments on her appearance every day. And not to mention the many men who will look her up and down or stare in her direction. Unless you are a extremely handsome man, nothing like that happens to you. You can probably go months without some stranger checking out your body or making a comment on your appearance. I’m guessing that complement you received is memorable because it doesn’t happen all the time. But if you had 4-5 people commenting on your appearance every day, you’d likely feel different.

So it’s probably not applicable to say because a man likes getting a complement on his appearance, then a woman should as well. I imagine most straight men would tire of complements if they received several every day from gay men and unattractive women that were trying to hit on them.

368

Huh, I must have made a typo where I said, “always believe all women under all circumstances.”

Hmmm, no that’s not it, what are you going on about?

I would tell him that his policy is going to hurt his business, as he will not be hiring the most qualified people for positions, and could hurt it more if he finds himself in a discrimination lawsuit.

I would tell him exactly the same. If he can’t handle it, then maybe he shouldn’t be managing or owning a business.

369

When do you have time to actually do the work that I assume the company is paying you to do?

370

So, if I read you right, you’re saying hire the absolute legal minimum number of women, marginalize them as much as is possible to minimize the threat of litigation, and basically adopt all the behaviors that the article suggests are destructive to the career prospects of women in general?

Because, threatening people with legal action is a way to get them to be minimally and very resentfully compliant, and calling them jerks while accusing them of great failings is a great way to get them to hate you and whatever you stand for, but if you care 2 hoots about actually understanding the positions of others and potentially persuading them to see things differently than they do rather than react as defensively as possible to protect themselves, you ought to consider your own approach as suicidal to the cause.

371

Hang on, really? Do you know someone who was accused of sexual assault, it never went to trial but stayed as gossip and rumor, and as a result of those rumors, they ended up homeless, friendless, jobless, and shunned? Because I’ve never heard of that. You’d think that’d make the news, given the massive number of far-right rags constantly on the hunt for the latest bullshit “PC gone mad” story. :confused:

See, kind of like how we take a different standard of evidence when it comes to legal claims and private claims, we also take a different standard of action when it comes to that. Of the 6 people involved in my ex’s rape, one was kicked out of school and none of the others faced serious consequences for their heinous actions. Pretty much nobody even knows about it. One of them caught up with her to apologize years later - the only consequence he faced was a guilty conscience. Nobody went after him. Fuck, dude, Brock “Poster Boy For Rape Culture” Turner claims to have a landscaping job! Because, as it turns out, while victims of sexual assault often suffer prolonged trauma at the hands of their rapists, society as a whole is pretty willing to just move on. Do you honestly think anyone will even remember that 10 years from now? And even if they google, do you think anyone will care?

What you’re describing isn’t a real thing. Or if it is, it’s like false accusations of rape in the legal system - incredibly rare.

Meanwhile, in reality, Louis C. K. is already making a comeback. Roger Ailes went from running Fox News to running a presidential campaign. Donald Trump became the president of the united states. Brett Kavanaugh is sitting on the supreme court. Fuck, even Justine Sacco got a new job a month after losing her old one (and, as that WaPo article points out, there are plenty of people not extended that same courtesy, such as feminist authors chased off twitter by death threats). But by all means, keep tilting at windmills. Keep acting like the obscenely rare issue of men being falsely accused of rape is the biggest, most important issue here.

“What you’re doing isn’t just wrong, shitty, and statistically illiterate, it’s also illegal, and you need to stop. I thought I knew you better than that; I thought you were a better person than that. I’m really disappointed.”

372

Until someone shows up at a meeting, or is newly hired, who has been told that nothing not work-related should ever be said in a “professional” setting, and complain to the management. In the current climate, the result makes little doubt. They aren’t going to say “what about removing this gigantic chip you have on your shoulder?”. In other words this kind of humane work environment only exists currently at the whim of the most fragile special snowflake and can be turned at any time into “No socialization tolerated. Be just drones, will you?”. I mean, I don’t know what your work environment is like, but it’s clearly what many people in this thread expect.

This evolution towards a drone only environment is very clear to me, and the fact that any subjective perception of untoward behavior (note what has been discussed before about the older guy having to abstain from friendly chit-chat with the new hire because who knows how she might perceive it) will be considered a very serious issue is only part and parcel of this evolution. Without even going into accusations of sexual harassment, the lines drawn in the sand just in case someone would complain of something are more and more narrow, and this participate in the progressive destruction of any possibility of retaining a relaxed and friendly environment (of course, some are thinking right now : “relaxed and friendly for men, sexually agressive and oppressive for women” because they can’t conceive that making sure that every single snowflake is never offended by anything could result in a degradation of work environment for all others, men and women alike. If a woman is offended, it has to be because some male oppressor perpetuated some kind of self-serving sexist attitude like being friendly with the new hire). Case in point : all pictures (like postcards, family pictures, etc…) have been banned in an office, just to be on the safe side.

373

What I’m saying is that this is exactly what people here are wishing for, and what would actually happen if they were listened to. They want a low bar for social consequences in case of rape accusations. Stating that it would only hurt “reputation”. Once again, would you hire, date, be friend with someone you assume is a rapist? Please answer that. If then everybody was assuming that an accused is actually a rapist, what do you think would happen to them? Why do you think that people accused of rape keep a spouse, a job, etc…if not because some people around them don’t assume any accusation to be true?

And as for rape accusation being so consequence-free : do you seriously believe that if people googling your name were finding “accused of being a rapist”, even in the way things are now, your prospects for dates and jobs would stay the same? Please answer to that too.
Finally, what I described does happen. In a previous thread about social lynching by internet, I pointed at the example of this guy who was fired the next day, and was unable to find another job for several fucking years, and lost everything and eventually everyone. His crime? He had talked badly to a young minimal wage employee of some corporation while he was protesting their anti-gay policies. His life was totally destroyed by this. And you think it couldn’t happen to someone considered a rapist? The internet mob can now destroy anybody’s life for the flimsiest reason.

374

I just don’t think that people giving compliments to coworkers is the problem, and I don’t think banning social behavior is the solution.

The problem is willfully ignorant abusers that pretend that they honestly think that telling a woman that they think she’d look good naked is an appropriate compliment. And they do it just because they enjoy discomforting women. And if you attempt to curtail this behavior by banning compliments and non-work conversation, the guy is still going to harass. He’ll just stare her down or lean in too close when discussing work or something. He’ll find a way.

Myself, I think a socially bonded workplace helps to deter harassers. If you have coworkers you consider friends, you can compare notes and agree on who the creepers are. You can help each other defuse and defeat the creepy guy. Abusers thrive on isolation and it’s way easier to isolate your victims if they don’t have friends around.

375

…Narrator: “etasyde was not reading this right.”

Which article are you citing?

If a company director removes seatbelts from company cars because they “lower productivity” it would be absolutely appropriate to “threaten legal action” to get that director to not do that. If that company director insists on removing the seatbelts then “jerk” is an appropriate characterization . And that director decided to “hate me” because of what I did why should I care? I’ll report him and get him to comply.

And if that company director only does the minimum to minimize the threat of litigation and that “minimum” threatens the health-and-safety of that directors employees: why would I stop fighting for the rights of the employees? I continue the fight.

Threatening legal action is not “suicidal to the cause.” I understand the position of others perfectly well. Telling someone who is breaking employment law and who is opening themselves up to a lawsuit “that they are breaking employment law and could be subject to a lawsuit” is a perfectly cromulent thing to do.

376

“Stop being an idiot.”

“Stop harassing your employees.”

377

That would be an appropriate answer if I had chastised you for stating that you were always believing women in all circumstances, which I didn’t.
On the other hand, you didn’t answer to what I actually said, which is : can you explain to me again how you can at the same time believe the woman and not disbelieve the man? Because after repeating that one must believe women, you insisted that you could somehow do one and not do the other. It must be great to be able to believe at the same time “He groped me” and “I didn’t grope her”, but I’m unable to achieve this feat, personally.
Can you clarify exactly what you mean by “believe women”? Others on your side at least are logically consistent when they say things like “I’ll believe women because false accusations are so incredibly rare that it’s more likely that I’ll be struck by a meteorite. So I won’t believe the man’s denial.”

378

Exactly. People are living in the past or a deliberate state of denial when they severely underestimate instant and global communications.

379

But this isn’t at all “believe the woman”.

380

Maybe not your interpretation, but words and phrases can mean different things in different contexts and to different people .