#MeToo has caught on, good thing or bad thing ?

One eyed Jack

B0jangles wrote: »

You really should have checked with these guys ^^^ before you posted; they obviously know more about what happened to you that you do.

Whereas you imagine you know more about the majority of women than I do solely by virtue of the fact that you're a woman and I'm a man, so I'll, as you put it "always be speaking from a position of ignorance" -

B0jangles wrote: »

Whether such the actual risk justifies such caution, the majority of women are brought up to be very aware of their surroundings, to be aware of the importance of not being in isolated places by themselves, to be aware if someone might be following them at night and so on.

That is the common experience of most women. You can handwave it away as nonsense all you like but you will always be speaking from a position of ignorance.

That's handwaving, not to mention the fact that due to your own ignorance you have no idea how much research I've done or my experience with women whom some women are so fond of reminding us are our sisters, mothers, friends, cousins, work colleagues, etc.

Objectivity is like a dirty word for people who want to spread their extremist ideologies. The problem though with that is that people aren't as stupid as you need them to be in order to buy into an ideology that paints men out to be the scourge of women.

B0jangles

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Whereas you imagine you know more about the majority of women than I do solely by virtue of the fact that you're a woman and I'm a man, so I'll, as you put it "always be speaking from a position of ignorance" -

That's handwaving, not to mention the fact that due to your own ignorance you have no idea how much research I've done or my experience with women whom some women are so fond of reminding us are our sisters, mothers, friends, cousins, work colleagues, etc.

Objectivity is like a dirty word for people who want to spread their extremist ideologies. The problem though with that is that people aren't as stupid as you need them to be in order to buy into an ideology that paints men out to be the scourge of women.

I have never sought to explain how your own experiences didn't happen to you, so the comparison falls down from the start.

I essentially pointed out that unless you have lived as a woman you cannot know what it is like to be one. I have never lived as a man, I have no personal experience of what that's like, so I try to avoid explaining men's experiences to them as though I have some insight that they do not have.

You however, are quite happy to tell me and other women that we are imagining or exaggerating aspects of our own lives. Why you think you have some greater insight remains to be explained.

I'm not quite sure why you've now decided I have an extremist ideology that I am apparently trying to spread; is it because I agreed with Kylith and disagreed with you?

erica74

Zulu wrote: »

No it is not.

Let's be very clear here, the norm is all the other cars that drove past you that didn't even notice you.

I thought it was "very clear" but I'll make it simple - I meant that is the norm of interactions I have with strange men who harass me in public. I assumed that was obvious.

pconn062

professore wrote: »

Let's face it, they were skangers .... they would harass anyone, male or female. It's not the "norm". It's the norm from people of a certain socioeconomic group.

Exactly, it's a sad state of affairs but you get skangers everywhere who will harass anyone they can find, male or female. And to be honest, that abuse is much more likely to be physical and involve violence if the victim is male.

givyjoe

erica74 wrote: »

I thought it was "very clear" but I'll make it simple - I meant that is the norm of interactions I have with strange men who harass me in public. I assumed that was obvious.

Do you mean that EVERY interaction with a guy you didn't know.. always ends up with you being harassed? That's what you mean by norm?

erica74

givyjoe wrote: »

Do you mean that EVERY interaction with a guy you didn't know.. always ends up with you being harassed? That's what you mean by norm?

When approached by a strange man in public and things didn't go along the path they had planned out in their head, yes, it ended in harassment like I described above.

Will I Am Not

erica74 wrote: »

When approached by a strange man in public and things didn't go along the path they had planned out in their head, yes, it ended in harassment like I described above.

How often do you get harassed by strange men?

kylith

pconn062 wrote: »

Exactly, it's a sad state of affairs but you get skangers everywhere who will harass anyone they can find, male or female. And to be honest, that abuse is much more likely to be physical and involve violence if the victim is male.

"Oh look, a thread about how women are regularly hassled and made to feel unsafe and objectified whilst going about their daily lives from the time they hit puberty by men who at worst rape and beat and at best demand that the women pay them attention. I simply must drop in to say 'but what about the men?!'"

erica74

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

How often do you get harassed by strange men?

Do you think I'm going to recount every incident and have it helpfully explained to me?

How many is too many? How many is not enough? Is there a scale?

B0jangles

You have to laugh at the way the CSI-After Hours team is now busily cross-examining erica74 to find the cracks in her obviously exaggerated (probably fabricated) account of being harassed in the street.

Will I Am Not

erica74 wrote: »

Do you think I'm going to recount every incident and have it helpfully explained to me?

No. I just find it strange that it would happen often. You must be really unlucky... or most men are sexually deviant arseholes.

erica74

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

No. I just find it strange that it would happen often. You must be really unlucky... or most men are sexually deviant arseholes.

I'm guessing by the language you've used that you're telling me I'm really unlucky.

Jesus

Way to cover yerselves in glory lads

http://metro.co.uk/2017/10/25/george-h-w-bush-apologises-after-sexual-assault-allegation-7025274/

The old Bush accused of sex assault because of where his hand was in this photo.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

No. I just find it strange that it would happen often. You must be really unlucky... or most men are sexually deviant arseholes.

Which is kind of the fcuking point of all this. It's not strange, it does happen often, it's a pain in the arse and can be scary.

Though some people seem to have weird Chrome extension that replaces every sentence typed by a woman concerning harassment or assault with:

I HATE MEN AND ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS

Will I Am Not

erica74 wrote: »

I'm guessing by the language you've used that you're telling me I'm really unlucky.

I’m sure most women have experienced unwanted attention in their lives. I’m sure a lot of women were harassed as a result of that unwanted attention.
To be harassed like that on a regular basis is surely uncommon?
I mean, how can one person encounter so many arseholes?

erica74

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

I’m sure most women have experienced unwanted attention in their lives. I’m sure a lot of women were harassed as a result of that unwanted attention.
To be harassed like that on a regular basis is surely uncommon?
I mean, how can one person encounter so many arseholes?

Maybe you should ask - why are there so many (to use your choice of description) arseholes?

Will I Am Not

erica74 wrote: »

Maybe you should ask - why are there so many (to use your choice of description) arseholes?

I don’t believe there is to be honest. What qualifies as sexual harassment will vary from person to person but if you have to put up with the example you have given with the lads in the car, on a regular basis, then I think there would have to be an element of bad luck involved.

The overwhelming majority of men are not out to sexually harass women.

erica74

When someone posts about their experience, the replies are either explaining the experience because the person has obviously misunderstood it, asking what about men, pointing out some time a man was wrongfully accused, pointing out when women did similar but got treated differently and then ask why don't women report, tell someone etc and repeat.

neonsofa

erica74 wrote: »

When someone posts about their experience, the replies are either explaining the experience because the person has obviously misunderstood it, asking what about men, pointing out some time a man was wrongfully accused, pointing out when women did similar but got treated differently and repeat.

And then ask why we don't tell people/report it

Greta Uneven Termite

Greta Uneven Termite wrote: »

Which is kind of the fcuking point of all this. It's not strange, it does happen often, it's a pain in the arse and can be scary.

The point is that there is no effort to suggest that it's a small group that is behaving the same way. Or no effort to identify a socio-economic group of men. Or a particular age group of males as being guilty of behaving this way.

Instead, it's an accusation thrown at "men". The majority of male posters to this thread have suggested that most men wouldn't harass women in any manner, but the defenders of the metoo campaign here refuse to consider that the males behaving this way do not represent the male gender.

I'm sure someone will pop in to say that nobody is suggesting that all men or the majority of men are responsible, although they'll probably suggest that men should be reining in those that do. And then after a post or two, it will go back to describing "men" as harassing women.

Though some people seem to have weird Chrome extension that replaces every sentence typed by a woman concerning harassment or assault with:

Unlikely. They'll object to the sweeping generalizations within this thread about men. If such generalizations about women are raised, there is an "acceptable" eruption of objections... however, when it applies to men, it's an attack on women. somehow.

I accept that women are harassed by some boys/men. I suspect they're probably men in groups, and likely quite young. Not sure about economic backgrounds, since middle class teens are often worse than the poorer parts of society. But at least, try to identify those factors. Try to suggest that certain "types"/groupings (whatever) are more likely to behave badly. Rather than simply applying it all to "men".

Women tend to react badly to sexism directed their way... and rightly so. Why be surprised when sexism applied to men causes such a similar reaction. Nobody likes being labelled a negative gender stereotype.

professore

If I say on here as a man that it is the norm for women (or gays, or Muslims, or travellers) to shout abuse at me, then I should not be surprised if people express skepticism, or accuse me of exaggerating because I'm racist - even if what I am saying is true.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

professore wrote: »

If I say on here as a man that it is the norm for women (or gays, or Muslims, or travellers) to shout abuse at me, then I should not be surprised if people express skepticism, or accuse me of exaggerating because I'm racist - even if what I am saying is true.

Nobody said that about men though.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Deleted User wrote: »

The point is that there is no effort to suggest that it's a small group that is behaving the same way. Or no effort to identify a socio-economic group of men. Or a particular age group of males as being guilty of behaving this way.

Some of the people who have cat called me or groped me or who I've seen harass other women:

An middle aged Polish man who roared I don't know what at me while grabbing his dick through his pants.

Two men in suits outside a bar as I walked past who asked me how much for a suck.

Car full of studenty looking types who roared out the window "I can see up your skirt you slut"

Middle aged, well spoken man who followed a Spanish girl from the bus stop asking where she was from, how long she was here etc., she was clearly not interested and intimidated, walking ahead of him, barely answering.

Elderly gentleman who groped me as he walked behind me on the stairs. When I was eleven.

Guy who owns a business I frequent, I've never seen him look a woman anywhere but dead in the boobs and he's made some very dodgy comments.

It'd be nice to think it's all scummers or young lads but it's not. But feel free to explain to me that yes it is.

Instead, it's an accusation thrown at "men". The majority of male posters to this thread have suggested that most men wouldn't harass women in any manner, but the defenders of the metoo campaign here refuse to consider that the males behaving this way do not represent the male gender.

I'm sure someone will pop in to say that nobody is suggesting that all men or the majority of men are responsible, although they'll probably suggest that men should be reining in those that do. And then after a post or two, it will go back to describing "men" as harassing women.

There are dozens of posts in this thread saying exactly and explicitly that it's not all men. Can you actually not see them because they don't suit your preconceptions?

I'm defending the metoo campaign. I in no way think that the people who have harassed me are representative of men. But that's not a point I'm going to make every second sentence to spare the delicate little feelings of people who think they should be constantly acknowledged for not groping strangers. That is a bare minimum of decency, I respect men enough that I expect more from them.

kylith

kylith wrote: »

"Oh look, a thread about how women are regularly hassled and made to feel unsafe and objectified whilst going about their daily lives from the time they hit puberty by men who at worst rape and beat and at best demand that the women pay them attention. I simply must drop in to say 'but what about the men?!'"

People are misunderstanding what's important about the whole #metoo business.

What's important here isn't that women are speaking up, perhaps for the first time, about abuse or harassment they've suffered, in a show of solidarity and in spirit of change. Get over yourselves ffs.

What's important is how men feel about it.

Oh, and how to pick up women who are going about their daily lives and why every man has a right to interrupt a womans day on the off chance she might be interested.

Let's get out priorities straight here ladies.

Greta Uneven Termite

Greta Uneven Termite wrote: »

It'd be nice to think it's all scummers or young lads but it's not. But feel free to explain to me that yes it is.

Nope. I'm genuinely grateful that you gave some details.

There are dozens of posts in this thread saying exactly and explicitly that it's not all men. Can you actually not see them because they don't suit your preconceptions?

Dozens of posts in how many pages? Hmm.. Yup. You're right. There are posts that say it's not all men.

I'm defending the metoo campaign. I in no way think that the people who have harassed me are representative of men.

Thank you. That's exactly what I wanted to hear.

My only other objection to the metoo campaign is verification of the reports. Other than that, I fully support the movement to speak out.

But that's not a point I'm going to make every second sentence to spare the delicate little feelings of people who think they should be constantly acknowledged for not groping strangers. That is a bare minimum of decency, I respect men enough that I expect more from them.

You don't need to spare our feelings with every second sentence. Treat us the same way you would treat another woman. I'm perfectly happy with equality.

professore

There was a post saying it was the norm a bit back.

Berkley

Berkley wrote: »

People do have the right to approach whoever they want, the approachee then has the right to reject their approach. That's fact.

It is indeed critically important that we discuss pick up tactics, in a thread about women speaking up about sexual abuse and harrassment. Utterly vital.

So vital in fact that this must be the 1000th time you've registered to tell us how to do it. I wonder where you get the time, considering all the romantic success you have, and how busy it must keep you.

professore

I'm on the same page as electro-bitch. That's not a come on electro

professore

Candie wrote: »

Berkley wrote: »

People do have the right to approach whoever they want, the approachee then has the right to reject their approach. That's fact.

It is indeed critically important that we discuss pick up tactics, in a thread about women speaking up about sexual abuse and harrassment. Utterly vital.

So vital in fact that this must be the 1000th time you've registered to tell us how to do it. I wonder where you get the time, considering all the romantic success you have, and how busy it must keep you.

BOOM! That's what I'm talking about

professore

Berkley wrote: »

Candie wrote: »

It is indeed critically important that we discuss pick up tactics, in a thread about women speaking up about sexual abuse and harrassment. Utterly vital.

So vital in fact that this must be the 1000th time you've registered to tell us how to do it. I wonder where you get the time, considering all the romantic success you have, and how busy it must keep you.

Why are you being hostile towards me? This is a discussion forum, conversation will meander.

You wear a fedora, don't you?

Bambi985

Surely there's a way to block the spammy PUA rereg at this stage? Seriously the lad has been on the rampage for far too many days now.

metaoblivia

Greta Uneven Termite wrote: »

Which is kind of the fcuking point of all this. It's not strange, it does happen often, it's a pain in the arse and can be scary.

Though some people seem to have weird Chrome extension that replaces every sentence typed by a woman concerning harassment or assault with:

I HATE MEN AND ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS

When I first moved to California, I lived in Oakland and would walk to the BART station from my apartment every day for work. There was not a single day when I made this walk where I wasn't subjected to street harassment. Literally - every single day. It ranged from men making comments as I walked by to them pulling up in their cars and slowly following me.

It also got me a bona fide stalker, who would wait for me in the mornings and evening and follow me wherever I went - back home, into stores, etc. I changed my route at least 10 times - he always found me. I called the police 6 times and ended up having to break my lease a little early to move away, specifically to get away from him. (and in case you're wondering, the police never did anything because it's Oakland, they only have half the force they need. The advice I got was to tell them I thought I saw a gun when I called, but I'm not going to lie to the police).

I haven't experienced that level of street harassment anywhere else in the Bay area, but here are a few points:

1. There are places where street harassment is pervasive and will happen daily.

2. Street harassment is not on the same level as sexual assault - I agree. But the problem with street harassment is that you don't know how it might escalate. Normally it doesn't, which is part of the reason why I don't care too much when it happens, unless it's really nasty. I've experienced so much of it that I'm numb to most of it.

3. But that numbness, that "oh it's just street harassment," is dangerous too, because you don't know if it's going to escalate. Most of the time it doesn't. But sometimes it does. And that's one of the dangers of normalizing it or rolling your eyes when women talk about it and tut tutting about how it's not as serious as sexual assault. No, it's not. But it's also not behavior we should be condoning or ignoring. It's not a healthy way to interact with people.

4. Finally, I do draw a distinction between harassment and a cold approach from a well-meaning potential suitor. I'm generally very open to conversations striking up when I'm out and about. However, I understand women who feel differently. Many women have experienced being approached by a man who seems nice enough, but when she won't give him what he wants - whether it's her number or an engaged conversation - he suddenly turns nasty and harassment follows.

Most guys are not that guy. But a woman has no way of knowing that. All she knows is that a man has approached her and now the potential is there. If he chooses to turn nasty, there's not much she can do to stop it. And for some women, just opening that door and creating that potential is uncomfortable.

But I'm not going to lay the blame at her feet and say that she should that most men aren't like that. Instead, I see that reticence as an understandable reaction to a society that dismisses street harassment so readily. And why should it be her burden to lay aside the bad experiences she's had in the hopes that this one won't just be one more? Particularly when a lot of the conversation that surrounds preventing sexual assault is vigilance on the part of women. Don't tell women to be vigilant and responsible for their own well being and then get upset when that vigilance veers a little too far for your liking.

Berkley

Berkley wrote: »

What's this pua you speak of, never heard of it.

Not only a prolific Casanova, but also a comedian.

metaoblivia

metaoblivia wrote: »

But I'm not going to lay the blame at her feet and say that she should that most men aren't like that. Instead, I see that reticence as an understandable reaction to a society that dismisses street harassment so readily. And why should it be her burden to lay aside the bad experiences she's had in the hopes that this one won't just be one more? Particularly when a lot of the conversation that surrounds preventing sexual assault is vigilance on the part of women. Don't tell women to be vigilant and responsible for their own well being and then get upset when that vigilance veers a little too far for your liking.

Great post. I think a large part of the problem is that not only do most men not realise how much unwelcome attention and harassment makes up the general 'white noise' of womens lives, but women are so used to it that it's tuned out to a large extent, and so not even acknowledged.

Not all men, since I have to specify that.

professore

Wow .... Lots of balanced and reasonable comments the last few pages. Would be interested to know how common catcalling and the like is in Ireland ... A lot has been said about parts of the Bay Area

anewme

Bambi985 wrote: »

Surely there's a way to block the spammy PUA rereg at this stage? Seriously the lad has been on the rampage for far too many days now.

Days?

I think this is the mad bloke who stays up all night and posts really early on Sunday mornings (while the mods are having a lie in) about really weird stuff. Someone else said he keeps going on abiut chore sex(whatever that is when it's at home)

More to be pitied than laughed at.

Noel82

Lewinski received a lot of backlash for this tweet

https://twitter.com/MonicaLewinsky/status/919732300862181377

PopePalpatine

What kind of gym has anime body pillows hanging around?

Bambi985

Candie wrote: »

I think a large part of the problem is that not only do most men not realise how much unwelcome attention and harassment makes up the general 'white noise' of womens lives, but women are so used to it that it's tuned out to a large extent, and so not even acknowledged.

That's a good point. I find it really hard to self-identify as a victim to this general bullsh1t or the #metoo campaign in a general sense, my experience with men has been grand by and large. But funnily enough it's been the few occasions where one of the lovely men in my life has been present to witness said bullsh1t and has had some sort of reaction to it, that I've realised the extent to which I've been conditioned to just ignore and get on with my day.

I remember an ex of mine seeing red and chasing a guy out of a pub because he made a really gross remark to me, and my father telling another charming character to **** off or he'd call the cops when he made an obscene gesture at me on the street - thinking I was alone of course, as these guys always have big balls naturally enough. Both incidents went right over my head and what shocked me more was the reaction of my ex and my dad - like this was some sort of obscene event and not something that is prone to happen randomly any day of the week.

You compartmentalise after a certain point, scumbag men vs men that would be appalled by such behaviour. And yeah they're a very vocal minority, but when the rhetoric surrounding this sort of street behaviour is overwhelmingly "women get on with it" and "stop being a drama queen" rather than "hey scumbag men, quit the predatory behaviour", I can understand how women will be exasperated and have their backs up.

professore

I guess I am guilty of overestimating how many good people there are. Now and then I get a rude reminder.

erica74

professore wrote: »

Wow .... Lots of balanced and reasonable comments the last few pages. Would be interested to know how common catcalling and the like is in Ireland ... A lot has been said about parts of the Bay Area

Because all of the comments so far recounting experiences in Ireland aren't enough? We're on page 62.
Just by the way, I'm in Ireland and in my experience it is very common.
Why do the goalposts keep changing? Or should I say, why do you keep changing the goalposts?

pconn062

kylith wrote: »

"Oh look, a thread about how women are regularly hassled and made to feel unsafe and objectified whilst going about their daily lives from the time they hit puberty by men who at worst rape and beat and at best demand that the women pay them attention. I simply must drop in to say 'but what about the men?!'"

Hope you feel better now you've gotten that off your chest.

Honestly, I've added my few points and have read your contributions on this thread, so I won't be engaging with this thread any further.

Christy42

professore wrote: »

There was a post saying it was the norm a bit back.

I think it was saying it was the norm once they were approached out of the blue by dudes passing by.

222233

kylith wrote: »

This is the problem with #metoo, what one person would see as a compliment or a trivial annoyance another could be deeply affected by. I'd explain it as like a phobia; some people aren't bothered by rats at all, some people will scream for help should they have so much of an inkling that there's a mouse somewhere in the house. Therefore you shouldn't go lobbing rodents at someone unless you know them well enough to know how they will react. Similarly; be polite and respectful in your remarks to other people: you don't know what they have gone through in their life.

I respect what your saying, but we have to take things for what they are as well, in reality, while a remark might affect someone terribly emotionally would a remark and a violent assault receive the same penalties in court? I doubt they would, because they are not the same. #Metoo is incorporating many different perceived or actual offences into one category and that's not necessarily a good thing. If you consider physical assault v's verbal assault - my co-worker calling me a "cnut" is not the same as my co-worker punching me in the face, both might be damaging to me in different ways, but they are not the same offence, and my co-worker calling me a cnut may not be an offence.

As a woman I feel that recently based on everything that has been emerging I am being encouraged to assume that I have been victimised when I don't feel that way - just because someone might have brushed off me in a nightclub or someone passed a comment one time when I walked past them.

One eyed Jack

B0jangles wrote: »

I have never sought to explain how your own experiences didn't happen to you, so the comparison falls down from the start.

That wasn't the comparison. The comparison was you suggesting I would always be arguing from a position of ignorance, while you assumed to be able to speak for the experiences of as you put it - "the vast majority of women". You simply cannot speak for anyone else's experiences but your own. Just because of your shared anatomy doesn't give you any more insight into the life of another woman outside of yourself. You really can't speak as to the experiences of the vast majority of women, and of course when you put that out there, people are entitled to question it rather than just listen and believe, particularly when your experience as a woman is in no way representative at all of the women in their lives. Just to give you one example - what you say you learned growing up and what you learned from your grandmother is nothing like what my sister learned growing up. It's nothing like what the vast majority of my friends learned growing up. Yours is without a doubt a completely different life to theirs, and I'm not just saying that to be argumentative or to make a point for the sake of making a point. I'm saying it because as much as you like to think that by virtue of the fact that you are a woman, does not mean that the vast majority of women have experienced anything or even close to anything like your experiences. They have their own minds and their own experiences, and this used to be acknowledged when women reminded men that they are not of a hive mind, and yet, well, here we are. We're now expected to listen and believe when we're told that women are a hive mind after all, and coincidentally enough, most of them just happen to think the same way you do. I've known enough women well enough throughout my life to know that simply isn't true. It's an idea that completely ignores the reality that people are actually individuals, not clones of each other based upon their sex.

I essentially pointed out that unless you have lived as a woman you cannot know what it is like to be one. I have never lived as a man, I have no personal experience of what that's like, so I try to avoid explaining men's experiences to them as though I have some insight that they do not have.

And I never claimed I knew what it was like to live as a woman, I simply pointed out that the idea that you can claim your experiences are representative of the majority of women, while it may well be subjectively true as far as you're concerned, it's certainly nowhere near objectively true as far as reality is concerned. Whether you'd try and explain men's experiences to them was really neither here nor there, as I wasn't trying to explain your experiences to you, I was attempting to explain to you that your experiences aren't nearly as universal as you want to believe they are. You can continue to believe it of course and more power to you if that's what gets you through the day. I don't have to believe it though - goes back to the whole reason why I disagreed with you earlier when you said that nobody is entitled to be listened to, but you had exceptions. I don't.

You however, are quite happy to tell me and other women that we are imagining or exaggerating aspects of our own lives. Why you think you have some greater insight remains to be explained.

I never told you any such thing. In fact I've always advocated quite the opposite -

It's not so much to be seen as a "victim" garners social currency and validation, but to be seen as a "survivor", to have overcome an ordeal. The language, and the perspective changed, the circumstances are still the same. The whole "idea" (inverted commas because to me it was always a stupid exercise in semantic gymnastics), was to "give people who have been raped back their power". Yet again, the very idea is to paint a certain "one size fits all" narrative of people who have been raped, and define them all in exactly the same language and the exact same fashion, as though they are a cookie-cutter mentality - "they have experienced rape, and that's all that matters".

It isn't, and it shouldn't be, because just the same way as some posters have pointed out that modern feminism wants to paint a narrative of women having no agency, it's just as detrimental for society IMO when we collectively shun, shame, and try to shut people down whom we don't agree with, because we just don't like the cut of their jib.

It's as though for a lot of people they need to define people who have experienced rape in a way that fits in with their sociobiolological mental model that's been formed over decades of social influence. It's as though anything which interferes with that and causes them to question it, causes them a cognitive dissonance which appears to upset some people greatly, and some more than others, and the only solution to that is to block out that which contradicts their already formed narrative.

I've met all sorts of people who have experienced rape, and there are some that I'll be glad if I never saw them or met them again. The thing is though - I don't have to like them, I don't have to agree with them, I can think they're full of shìt and so far up their own hole they're never likely to see the light of day. None of that means I can ever allow myself to tell them that they weren't raped, if they say they were. That, IMO, would take an arrogance and hubris on my part that quite frankly I just don't have (other people have the agency and the freedom of thought to disagree).

As for the idea of echo chambers? Jesus lads, take a look around before anyone starts criticising anyone else for the formation of echo chambers. Pre-internet, post-internet, bloody hell since the dawn of man, echo chambers have existed to exclude people from the group think and influence a particular narrative. How the fcuk does anyone think religions came about? Identity politics is just religion 2.0, and nobody has to have Mensa level IQ or EQ to be able to see that for themselves.

Could just go on believing what they want too, if that's what keeps them happy, there's always that option when someone wants to control their own space, and it's perfectly rational, understandable human behaviour that some people aren't just happy controlling their own space, but they want to control everyone else's too. It never amazed me in the first place that some people are surprised when they meet an equal but opposing force. I didn't need Newton to explain something I'd known ever since I was a child. That's why when you're pushing for something you want from someone, civility and personal responsibility for yourself, and respect towards others, will always be a far more worthy endeavour that will last long term, than bulling ahead without any regard as to the consequences of your actions for yourself, or for others.

From here: http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2057710031/37/#post102767140


As for why I think I have any insight at all, well I don't owe you an explanation. Pissing contests really aren't my thing. I can object to your claim by showing where it's fallacious without needing to go into laying out my own personal experiences, by simply demonstrating using the experiences of other women that your experiences as a woman are nowhere near as universal as you assume your experiences to be.

I'm not quite sure why you've now decided I have an extremist ideology that I am apparently trying to spread; is it because I agreed with Kylith and disagreed with you?

I didn't say you personally had an extremist ideology, I was referring to the idea of extremist ideologies in general. That you agree with kylith was really neither here nor there because what I was commenting on was the extremity of the ideology itself, the idea that men are the scourge of woman, that they are the greatest threat to women. I really don't have any interest in making it personally about either yourself or kylith, and I'm not taking what kylith said personally. I'm not taking it personally for the simple reason that it's crap. I'm not contradicting kylith's experiences that she made in her post, I'm not contradicting your experiences, I'm not explaining any woman's experiences to them. I absolutely believe your experiences, but what I don't have to believe, are your opinions, particularly when your opinions consist of a belief that is simply objectively untrue and without foundation or any credible evidence of any sort.

RabbleRouser2k

Noel82 wrote: »

Lewinski received a lot of backlash for this tweet

https://twitter.com/MonicaLewinsky/status/919732300862181377

I can understand why, too. For most of those who said 'Me too' there lives were made hell, or they were very disturbed by it-their experiences I mean.

Lewinsky made a lot of money out of the Clinton scandal. As well as turning it into business ventures, including knitted products, hand bags-a television presenting career, documentaries etc.
Also, she maintains, to this day, the relationship was consensual-that despite the power dynamics one could say were at play, their escapades were mutual.

That said, I don't agree with the demonization she received. I think Bill Clinton and Hillary are the lowest of the low, but were held up as these pious individuals by those who have shielded Weinstein despite knowing his crimes. I also agree with Lewinsky when she describes herself as 'patient zero'-someone who was dragged through the mud due to the then birthed World Wide Web. Shared jokes, articles, early memes etc.
No amount of money in the world is worth the public flogging she received.

carolmon

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

I can understand why, too. For most of those who said 'Me too' there lives were made hell, or they were very disturbed by it-their experiences I mean.

Lewinsky made a lot of money out of the Clinton scandal. As well as turning it into business ventures, including knitted products, hand bags-a television presenting career, documentaries etc.
Also, she maintains, to this day, the relationship was consensual-that despite the power dynamics one could say were at play, their escapades were mutual.

That said, I don't agree with the demonization she received. I think Bill Clinton and Hillary are the lowest of the low, but were held up as these pious individuals by those who have shielded Weinstein despite knowing his crimes. I also agree with Lewinsky when she describes herself as 'patient zero'-someone who was dragged through the mud due to the then birthed World Wide Web. Shared jokes, articles, early memes etc.
No amount of money in the world is worth the public flogging she received.

Well worth a watch.......I think you may agree if you watch it til the end that she was one of the people who "lives were made hell, or they were very disturbed by it-their experiences I mean"

she made have sold a few handbags but money isn't everything

https://www.ted.com/talks/monica_lewinsky_the_price_of_shame

RabbleRouser2k

carolmon wrote: »

Well worth a watch.......I think you may agree if you watch it til the end that she was one of the people who "lives were made hell, or they were very disturbed by it-their experiences I mean"

she made have sold a few handbags but money isn't everything

https://www.ted.com/talks/monica_lewinsky_the_price_of_shame

The problem I see with Lewinsky's situation is that by her own admission, she fell for her boss. How she was treated in the media, and on the then new world wide web, is something different entirely.
I'm probably splitting hairs about this.

But for me, the #metoo hash tag represents someone who was left traumatised by 'the act'-whatever the act was (groping, harassment, rape etc) rather than the attention it drew.

As Lewinsky said, her relationship was consensual, there was no force or violence used. She may regret the relationship now, but does that constitute being included in the '#metoo' movement?
I don't think it does.
But like I said, I could be splitting hairs on that.

neonsofa

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

The problem I see with Lewinsky's situation is that by her own admission, she fell for her boss. How she was treated in the media, and on the then new world wide web, is something different entirely.
I'm probably splitting hairs about this.

But for me, the #metoo hash tag represents someone who was left traumatised by 'the act'-whatever the act was (groping, harassment, rape etc) rather than the attention it drew.

As Lewinsky said, her relationship was consensual, there was no force or violence used. She may regret the relationship now, but does that constitute being included in the '#metoo' movement?
I don't think it does.
But like I said, I could be splitting hairs on that.

Has she explicitly said that the #metoo is in reference to bill? She may be referring to a completely different situation/person.