You seem to have a firm grasp of the situation. Proof is a thing of the past apparently.
Thanks brother, for relating your experiences. That’s great that you have never, up until this point, been on the receiving end of one of these things. I think that speaks volumes about your professionalism and common sense when considering these potential problems.
However, reputation is a weird thing. Even though I’m nearly %100% percent certain that the situation was quietly resolved and with no ill-will, I can’t ever be entirely sure unless I flat out ask her family. And trust me when I say that it’s not something that could be easily brought up again with a mere phone call to assuage my uneasiness. Even at family dinners, although it’s rare, I still feel a pang of guilt where there should be none and wonder if some of her family may still feel hostility towards me. I realize this is a failing on my own part, but that’s the way it is.
Right. This is what I was trying, clumsily, to get at. To say now that we have a new situation seems to be an argument that it’s problematic for men if women speak out because someone is likely to believe a child who makes a false accusation.
I’ve always wondered how " like 75% of attacks which the woman or child never tells anyone about, " are then able to be statistically verified?
Makes me question the validity of rape/assualt numbers, and sincerely doubt they’re accuracy.
Which they mostly should be. That said while it seems that there is a flood of accusations being made and being believed, the flood is specific to celebrities of various sorts (media or political mostly.) Not sure that this visible flood in any way corrects how victims who speak up against those who are not celebrities are handled. The hope is that the wide attention results in that, but assuming it has already would be facts not in evidence.
Most here at least I think would agree that revictimizing victims is bad and that our work and cultural environments should work towards making reporting abuse a safe thing to do. And there is lots of work to do to get there, current media attention notwithstanding.
The problem is that a few of those advocating for that end take extreme positions. Some in threads on this subject (I can search and find for each when time permits if someone insists) have argued that expressing any doubt about an accusation, questioning whether or not it is credible, giving any benefit of the doubt to one accused, makes you part of the problem. Some believe that we should just accept that all males over 50 with any power or celebrity are guilty and should not be surprised. Many believe the existence of an accusation, even if you do not know what the accusation was, is enough to find a man guilty in the court of public opinion and to justify ending the career of the individual (see Keillor, Garrison).
I can understand why seeing those positions expressed can trigger thinking about the issue from the perspective of someone who has not done anything wrong but is accused and, with no way to prove innocence, suffers career and societal (not criminal) impacts. I can understand how irrational fears about absurd accusations and to irrationally generalize those fears can be triggered.
Confidential polls in identities are protected.
Ya may want to give it a try yourself then.
How I do me is based on what I understand might be reasonably expected to bother or not bother others.
I believe it is reasonable to expect a woman to be concerned that a man they do not know appears to be following her into a parking structure late at night. Thus I will give more space if I am heading in the same direction to my car than I would if I was behind a male.
I do not think it is reasonable to expect a typical woman to be fearful if, in a movie theater, I sat in the same safe personal space zone that I would apply to another male. Nor for a parent or child to be worried about me on a park bench near a playground.
But I am always interested in hearing if many others have a different sense of what reasonable is. Are irrational fears of stranger danger so pervasive that more would be worried about a short bald man sitting on a park bench near a park than I would think.
Is LHOD’s altering his behavior to avoid a child making a false accusation against him in the classroom really rationally based?
I do briefly consider the inequity of being profiled based on my gender, and am cognizant that I would be upset if someone was expecting the same changes of behavior out of consideration of someone based on them looking Arab, or dark. But let’s be real. For me in my position in our society the parking structure (or dark street scenario) is a small ask.
Why do we put up with DAs who politicize law enforcement? Seriously. I don’t know.
No worries. You’re right, it was a weapon.
I don’t think it was clumsy. A lot of people have to say the same thing in different ways to get a point across, and I really hope we did.
…empathy with the OP? Nah. And I’ve already explained why.
Well good for you. You do you.
Feel free to ask these question to somebody interested in answering them. But please stop tacking them onto your responses to me because I do not care to answer them.
Case in point.
Thanks for sharing.
My apologies. The intent was to use an answer to you to pose the question to others reading as well. I appreciate that you are not curious about these things just as you are not interested in empathy that is not empathy to positions you like.
Are any others who are not the above poster interested in answering those questions?
If not fine.
I haven’t seen accusations expressed online that weren’t questioned at length, and I think its pretty standard in a thread to see numerous people chiming in on whether or not they are credible. It’s expected. The rest is kind of situational.
Re: Garrison Keillor and his show. His employers felt strongly enough to part ways with him, and no one else seems to know what he did. I read a comments section, there’s a mix of judgments and defenses and fence-sitting and outright disbelief, and things like: “I hope the woman that ruined Keillor has fun dying alone among her cats.” Again as expected.
I’m not seeing how the court of opinion has ruled one way or another on Keillor to leave you with a negative impression, but you have one. Would you mind explaining why?
Why?
Why does following these rules seem logical and prudent to you?
Is it because you have some deep down fear that if you didn’t you would suddenly become a sexual predator and start attacking kids.
No. Of course not. You know there is no way in hell you would ever harm one of those kids.
So the only other explanation that I can see is that the OP is FUCKING DEAD ON. We all alter our behavior in order to avoid being in a situation where we could be accused of doing something and our only defense would be denial.
Just to bring this all the way back to the OP:
Next time you’re in a significantly similar situation, figure you’ll change seats?
We do this in many ways. Last month, a nonprofit I work with changed its money handling rules to ensure that two people would see every donation check (I think the specifics are that the person who opens the mail isn’t the person who makes the deposit, or something). It’s not that we think there’s anyone in the office who’s gonna embezzle our limited funds; it’s that we alter our behavior in order to avoid being in a situation where we could be accused of malfeasance.
And this is also something of a modern thing: financial norms for nonprofits have tightened up in the last couple of decades, as near as I can tell. It’s no big deal.
So you are afraid to be alone with a non-related woman in a store?
Isn’t this what the VP gets made fun of for?
Yes. Without knowing even what the single accusation even was many here feel the decision of MPR to publicly “part ways” over sexual impropriety was just, and that there was no possibility that it was just … for PR purposes in the current MPR environment in which the PR costs of being perceived as enabling bad behavior or doubting an accuser could be significant. Read our thread on it for what readers here might be reacting to. Yes some wondering if this might be an overreaction but some also quite otherwise, and those quite otherwise it what I am talking about.
Let’s ignore the person who believes that any touch at the workplace is across the line and the one who insisted on sticking to an untruth that this was part of more than one accusation.
Here’s a typically very rational carnivorousplant responding to my observing that it seems “To question any presumed victim, to give any benefit of the doubt to an accused, is right now being seen as enabling abuse and as being part of the poblem.” with the simple
And this, meant I think seriously.
Is it unreasonable to have that sort of discussion trigger irrational fear among those over 40 who, to someone else may at least seem to have some power, that they could be accused just once (even by someone who just misinterpreted what they did or meant) and have no way to defend themselves?
No, I respect that she may be afraid to be alone with me in the store.
He goes a bit further than that, you know.
Yes we do. Many of us change our behavior out of fear that we could be falsely accused of something and would have no way to defend ourselves from the false accusation. Most of the time the actual risk of that happening is extremely infinitesimally small, yet we change our behaviors to protect ourselves anyway. No big deal, you say. I can accept that
But why are those instances rational and understandable acceptable concerns and actions while MMM is being mockably unacceptably irrational?
But you don’t respect that men might be afraid to be alone with you in the store?
In what way can he go further than “Afraid to be alone in a store with a woman”?
I think an important takeaway from recent events is that this is an opportune time for growth and self-awareness from EVERYONE, and there will be growing pains. As with any social movement. And since this is a social movement that affects EVERYONE maybe it will end up with the greatest changes.
A hastily-done wish list:
Victims will know that it’s ok to speak out
Higher-ups will know that it’s important to listen and take accusations seriously
People will know what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior
People will teach kids what is appropriate and inappropriate behavior, and respect for others
Attackers will know that they can’t get away with it anymore
Those looking to falsely accuse will know that it’s not worth it, and it is harmful to both the alleged attacker and to actual victims