Gate theatre employees speak out about director Michael Colgan's behaviour

goose2005

markodaly wrote: »

Why is it that so many of these people are of the artistic, film making, theatre vibe? These would generally be tolerant progressive work settings.

An awful lot of people want to work in these areas and only a tiny number can. This gives a lot of power to the gatekeepers. And the "tolerant progressive" stuff is often just talk

andekwarhola

The woman's story about the ass slap in the auditorium goes beyond harassment, it's actually disturbing.

Deusexmachina

seamus wrote: »

To be fair, she said absolutely nothing like that. You've conflated "constant harassment" with "all men harass". When she didn't say the latter or anything even implying it.

Hold on, this is what she actually said:

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

What does that mean then 'it's not the exception, it's the rule'?

If it's the rule, it means that men who do not practice misogny and sexual harassment are the exception.

And I think that is complete nonsense.

Sunflower 27

He's kept very quiet, hasn't he? For someone who seems to love the boom of his own voice....

Sunflower 27

Double post

Wanderer2010

Sunflower 27 wrote: »

He's kept very quiet, hasn't he? For someone who seems to love the boom of his own voice....

He needs time to put an appropriate spin on it, and no doubt looking for dirt on the accusers, so he can spin the whole thing as a combination of him "regretting acting like a bit of a player in the 80s and 90s but the women were refused promotion for various reasons and that these accusations are just a witch hunt. I have the upmost respect for women blah blah etc etc".

Caranica

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Hold on, this is what she actually said:

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

What does that mean then 'it's not the exception, it's the rule'?

If it's the rule, it means that men who do not practice misogny and sexual harassment are the exception.

And I think that is complete nonsense.

No, it means that in my professional and recreational activity circles it's rife. Not everywhere, not every man but so many that I interact with on a regular basis. But as someone has already pointed out, the women in the Gate were there because they were the handful who had the jobs wanted by so many. I'm in a similar position.

Deusexmachina

Caranica wrote: »

No, it means that in my professional and recreational activity circles it's rife. Not everywhere, not every man but so many that I interact with on a regular basis. But as someone has already pointed out, the women in the Gate were there because they were the handful who had the jobs wanted by so many. I'm in a similar position.

I am really sorry to hear that. It’s a horrible situation to be in. I was also bullied in work for some years and it lead to depression, stress and a severe drop in my confidence.
I work for myself now. I find it a relief not to be beholden to anyone - even if it means I can sometimes struggle financially. It’s worth it.
I hope you find your own way out in time. I hate bastards who exploit their power to make others fearful.
But do please believe me - there are great people out there - the majority of people are decent. (Male and female).
I don’t think misogyny or sexual harassment are the norm. To say that lets the real bastards off the hook.
I wish you well. Be strong. And feck the bullies!!!

Beechwoodspark

Around the time of his retirement from the gate I heard him on the pat kenny show with Michael gambon. Seemed an intelligent, charming, if slightly pompous man, but sure that's par for the course for the arts. He got on like a house on fire with kenny and it was clear Gambon was a good friend too.

Later that evening I happened to be in the company of someone who works in the theatre Industry and I mentioned I had heard Colgan and did this person have any opinion on him, as he came across very well on the radio earlier.

I was expecting a warm tribute to the man on the occasion of his retirement from the Gate.

Instead the person reacted almost in horror and outlined colgans reputation as a lecherous bully prone to wildly inappropriate behaviour. The anecdotes were similar to what has come out recently.

I couldn't believe it and internally thought that maybe this person had a grudge against such a well respected, well connected man!

Well, the truth is out now. And also, it seems his reputation was widely known to Many in Dublin and the theatre world.

expectationlost

_Dara_ wrote: »

Can't believe that Colgan was also on the board of the Gate Theatre. That means he saw all the complaints made about him and got to be part of the discussions about the complaints. :eek:

I know someone who worked in that administrative office a few years back. I thought she liked the job so was surprised when she left abruptly. Making more sense now though...

is the Gate Theatre director essentially Gate CEO?, thus not usual to be on the board

riclad

I think there,s 1000 of case,s of sexual harrassment going on in the tech industry and entertainment industry .
Its just a matter of time til more women come forward and make a complaint .

Any company or theatre that recieves state funding should have a rule ,the board is 50/50 male female .

This might reduce the amount of sexual harrassment and encourage
people of either sex to come forward and make a complaint .
Theres too many companys where 95 per cent of the management are men,even though they have many women as employees.
I think things would change for the better if 30-40 per cent of the TD,S in the dail were women .

Deusexmachina

riclad wrote: »

I think there,s 1000 of case,s of sexual harrassment going on in the tech industry and entertainment industry .
Its just a matter of time til more women come forward and make a complaint .

Any company or theatre that recieves state funding should have a rule ,the board is 50/50 male female .

This might reduce the amount of sexual harrassment and encourage
people of either sex to come forward and make a complaint .
Theres too many companys where 95 per cent of the management are men,even though they have many women as employees.
I think things would change for the better if 30-40 per cent of the TD,S in the dail were women .

Hysterical over the top drama (pardon the pun)

lightspeed

I dont understand people in this country. We have very tight laws and regulations such as equality acts and unfair sismissal which includes protections for constructive dismissal.

I read the irish times piece and most seem to refer to sexual assault and bullying. Surely they could have easily lodged a complaint with HR and if that fails sue for 2-3 times their yearly salary for constructive dismissal.

Are we to assume they would never have found another office based job elsewhere?

Im a male and never experienced sexual harrasment like that ive work in companies before that reguarlly tried to screw employees. I was managements greatest headache and they backed down everytime.

In the irish times article it mentions one employee complained to the board and they did nothing and also he was on the board himself. Like after nothing is done then, they have basically given that employee a winning lottery ticket to sue for constructive dismissal.

I dont care how policltically incorrect it is to say it, if these women knew there were concrete laws and actions they could have taken but chose not to, then they too are part of the problem.

Prune Tracy

I worked right next to a woman who was being sexually harassed by her manager - I can understand why she didn't complain him: he was much more powerful than she was, what if she wasn't believed? What if she got in trouble for such an indictment? What if her job and livelihood were affected? She had two small children to support.

No, the only person at fault is the abuser exploiting their position of power.

lightspeed

Prune Tracy wrote: »

I worked right next to a woman who was being sexually harassed by her manager - I can understand why she didn't complain him: he was much more powerful than she was, what if she wasn't believed? What if she got in trouble for such an indictment? What if her job and livelihood were affected? She had two small children to support.

No, the only person at fault is the abuser exploiting their position of power.

The premise of your argument is nonsense. By that logic why have any laws against such behaviour?

If she was not believed by her employer then thats when she could move to the lottery option and go to court for constructive dismissal which have provided some livelihood until she found another job. This "you will never work in this town again" nonsense is just bullying horse****.

We have a system where any bullying sexual harrassment issues have to be taken seriously otherwise an employee can easily sue the company for large anounts of money and cause serious damage to a companys reputation.

Given that the above us true, employers should instantly **** themselves at the idea of ignoring this behaviour or even breaching employee rights.

However, there are many dodgy employers in this country both large and small that dont worry about screwing their employees because its not commonplace for employees to enforce their rights in this country.

By not enforcing the controls to prevent this behaviour, those women facilitated an environment where further women were subjected to it.

We all know that plenty of those in government knew there were kids being abused by the catholic priests back in 1960/70s. They did nothing which allowed the abuse to continue. Are you honestly saying they were not at fault and only the priests inflicting the abuse were responsible?

Based on the logic of your argument that only the abuser and not those that do speak out and allow it to continue bear responsibility for the problem, its a fair and accurate comparison.

Prune Tracy

I would have said that too, but being close to such a situation made me realise it's not that straightforward, even if the fear is unfounded.

Something gave that man the confidence and arrogance to do such a thing without fear - and it is that structure in place which needs to be tackled. Your view might be that it's in place because of people not speaking out. My view is that that structure is what causes the fear to *prevent* people speaking out.

The internal politics of an organisation can be a very tough nut to crack - irrespective of legislation.

cloudatlas

lightspeed wrote: »

I dont understand people in this country. We have very tight laws and regulations such as equality acts and unfair sismissal which includes protections for constructive dismissal.

I read the irish times piece and most seem to refer to sexual assault and bullying. Surely they could have easily lodged a complaint with HR and if that fails sue for 2-3 times their yearly salary for constructive dismissal.

Are we to assume they would never have found another office based job elsewhere?

Im a male and never experienced sexual harrasment like that ive work in companies before that reguarlly tried to screw employees. I was managements greatest headache and they backed down everytime.

In the irish times article it mentions one employee complained to the board and they did nothing and also he was on the board himself. Like after nothing is done then, they have basically given that employee a winning lottery ticket to sue for constructive dismissal.

I dont care how policltically incorrect it is to say it, if these women knew there were concrete laws and actions they could have taken but chose not to, then they too are part of the problem.

I think it's fairly difficult in this country for anyone to take a case to court for bullying, most settle out of court. In this case the women would have needed witnesses and proof that the Gate knew about it and did nothing, it's very tough to build a case.

retro:electro

I'd never heard of him before this but having read the article he sounds like absolute scum of the earth. A revolting piece of sh!t.

stinkle

_Dara_ wrote: »

Can't believe that Colgan was also on the board of the Gate Theatre. That means he saw all the complaints made about him and got to be part of the discussions about the complaints. :eek:

I know someone who worked in that administrative office a few years back. I thought she liked the job so was surprised when she left abruptly. Making more sense now though...

His presence on the board must have totally dictated how any complaint discussions were framed and dealt with, too. I don't envy any other board member tackling such a situation, especially as it seems everyone who came in contact with him had some familiarity with how he was. It must have been futile for them to even think about doing anything by the book of HR policies.

Never met the man personally, but did hear a story a number of years back about him cracking on to a much younger woman in some bar or other frequented by the rugby crowd. In the presence of her other half and family members. The man seems to be a boor who thinks he's a god. I wrote the story I heard off as "typical entitled upper-middle class Irish man in a position of power archetype". big fish, small pond mentality.

Power corrupts, and I have no doubt we'll hear similar stories from other industries soon.

Donald Trump

Caranica wrote: »

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

Sorry for harassing you the other day. I had thought that I was just being polite and saying thanks when you handed me my change.

Your should give Jet Li a few tips on beating off multiple fellas coming at you at once (no puns intended)

Arghus

Donald Trump wrote: »

Sorry for harassing you the other day. I had thought that I was just being polite and saying thanks when you handed me my change.

Your should give Jet Li a few tips on beating off multiple fellas coming at you at once (no puns intended)

You've done your bit to help prove her point.

Outlaw Pete

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/equality_in_work/harassment_at_work.html

_Dara_

expectationlost wrote: »

is the Gate Theatre director essentially Gate CEO?, thus not usual to be on the board

I’m not exactly sure but it seems like he shouldn’t be on it, it’s a conflict of interest. The board should be separate and impartial. He has too much power if he’s both.

valoren

He will reply to the allegations and I can't wait to hear this guys response.
Nothing like watching a serial bully get their comeuppance.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1105/917599-arts-council/

My money is on him deflecting with the old reliable of all of this being a 'misunderstanding' that it was all simply 'banter'.
That the things he was saying to these women was him just trying to be funny, to have a laugh.
That on self-reflection, he is appalled at the thought that they were offended at 'friendly banter' with his colleagues who he has nothing but respect and admiration for. With a self-congratulatory coda about the his own admiration for other women's bravery in speaking out against sexual harassment.

From reading the allegations against him, he sounds like a sleazy narcissistic scumbag.

cloudatlas

valoren wrote: »

He will reply to the allegations and I can't wait to hear this guys response.
Nothing like watching a serial bully get their comeuppance.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1105/917599-arts-council/

My money is on him deflecting with the old reliable of all of this being a 'misunderstanding' that it was all simply 'banter'.
That the things he was saying to these women was him just trying to be funny, to have a laugh.
That on self-reflection, he is appalled at the thought that they were offended at 'friendly banter' with his colleagues who he nothing but respect and admiration for.

From reading the allegations against him, he sounds like a narcissistic, odious scumbag.

It'll probably be the old sorry that you were offended by my offensive behaviour non apology with the I don't remember excuse tacked on.

The Gate are going to carry out an investigation that'll be thorough I'm sure :rolleyes:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/gate-trustee-expresses-deep-concern-at-colgan-allegations-1.3281073

seamus

50/50 his response will be

- an aggressive rant about "scurrilous slurs" on his character that he will challenge through legal avenues.
or
- a tone-deaf response about misunderstandings occurring out of a desire to maintain a friendly work environment

optogirl

Stacksofwacks wrote: »

Nice brush, would you like tar with it?

In fairness the statment says majority of women harassed, not majority of men are harassers.

Dick phelan

Sound like a horrible piece of work however i'm not really ok with this modern trial by social media we are having, The proper channels should still apply ie the Guards ect not really a good situation where people are named and shamed on twitter or some blog post without a proper hearing and deemed already guilty.

Grayson

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Hold on, this is what she actually said:

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

What does that mean then 'it's not the exception, it's the rule'?

If it's the rule, it means that men who do not practice misogny and sexual harassment are the exception.

And I think that is complete nonsense.

No it doesn't mean that. If say 10% of men harass multiple women each day then it will be the norm for women to face harassment.

If there's an office with 10 men and 10 women but one of the men is a scumbag who harasses women the it's the norm for him to harass the women there and it's the norm for them to be harassed. However that doesn't mean that the majority of men in the office are harassers.

Not all men are scumbags but it only takes a small number of them to be scumbags to have a huge effect on women.

So saying every woman has been on the end of harassment does not mean the majority of men are harassers.

It's very, very simple maths and logic.

AustinLostin

Dick phelan wrote: »

Sound like a horrible piece of work however i'm not really ok with this modern trial by social media we are having, The proper channels should still apply ie the Guards ect not really a good situation where people are named and shamed on twitter or some blog post without a proper hearing and deemed already guilty.

Yeah I get where you're coming from, but the nature of the incidents here would indicate to me that the guards couldn't do much without the people who encountered Colgan's behavior coming together to show a pattern of incidents. Many of these incidents, taken in isolation, albeit unacceptable, would more than likely be overlooked or 'dealt with' in a way that everything continues as normal, in my opinion. Don't agree with 'trial by twitter' or anything but it seems like a tool here to unite the victims as much as shame the alleged perpetrator.

Grayson

Dick phelan wrote: »

Sound like a horrible piece of work however i'm not really ok with this modern trial by social media we are having, The proper channels should still apply ie the Guards ect not really a good situation where people are named and shamed on twitter or some blog post without a proper hearing and deemed already guilty.

It's the fact that it lasted so long. It's the same with the catholic church. What made the scandal there so bad wasn't that a priest was a paedophile. It's statistically likely that there will be a few. I read a study which showed that the number of priests who are abusers is the same percentage as there would be in the general population. So it's not that priests were more likely to be abusers. It's the fact that there was a cover up for years which enabled them to keep abusing.

We see in cases like this that the abuser is in a position of power. Just like Weinstein in Hollywood or priests in Ireland. And so the abusive behaviour lasts for years.

seamus

Grayson wrote: »

So saying every woman has been on the end of harassment does not mean the majority of men are harassers.

It's very, very simple maths and logic.

Indeed, it's like saying, "You can't walk down Grafton Street without being constantly harrassed by chuggers". That doesn't men that everyone on Grafton St is a chugger, in fact there may only be 10 or 20 of them on the street. But there are enough of them to make the process of trying to walk down the street an ordeal.

Grayson

seamus wrote: »

Indeed, it's like saying, "You can't walk down Grafton Street without being constantly harrassed by chuggers". That doesn't men that everyone on Grafton St is a chugger, in fact there may only be 10 or 20 of them on the street. But there are enough of them to make the process of trying to walk down the street an ordeal.

That's a far better way of saying it.

Sunflower 27

valoren wrote: »

He will reply to the allegations and I can't wait to hear this guys response.
Nothing like watching a serial bully get their comeuppance.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2017/1105/917599-arts-council/

My money is on him deflecting with the old reliable of all of this being a 'misunderstanding' that it was all simply 'banter'.
That the things he was saying to these women was him just trying to be funny, to have a laugh.
That on self-reflection, he is appalled at the thought that they were offended at 'friendly banter' with his colleagues who he has nothing but respect and admiration for. With a self-congratulatory coda about the his own admiration for other women's bravery in speaking out against sexual harassment.

From reading the allegations against him, he sounds like a sleazy narcissistic scumbag.

I 100% agree this is the line he will take. There is too many to pass off as "never happened".

I was thinking if I was in the place and was being harassed, I'd have got the other women together and suggested making secret recordings and then releasing that to the press. No point going to the board as he was well protected there. He couldn't sack anyone when HIS behaviour was in the spotlight.

Everyone is up in arms now his behaviour is in the press. Pity he got such a long stint where he was. It's sickening to think such a vile character held such a position of privilege for so long.

In saying that, he has been exposed for the bullying, sexist pervert he is. No amount of money can make this right for him now. And he won't be remembered as the man that saved the Gate. He will be remembered as the loathsome creep that he is. Given how important status is to him, this will really hurt. Good.

Deusexmachina

Grayson wrote: »

No it doesn't mean that. If say 10% of men harass multiple women each day then it will be the norm for women to face harassment.

If there's an office with 10 men and 10 women but one of the men is a scumbag who harasses women the it's the norm for him to harass the women there and it's the norm for them to be harassed. However that doesn't mean that the majority of men in the office are harassers.

Not all men are scumbags but it only takes a small number of them to be scumbags to have a huge effect on women.

So saying every woman has been on the end of harassment does not mean the majority of men are harassers.

It's very, very simple maths and logic.

Here’s her post (again):

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

She is not in any way suggesting it is a ‘small number of men’. She is stating that ‘it’s the rule’ for her and her friends to be sexually harassed on an almost daily basis - not the exception, the rule.

It is was the same few men, then they are certainly getting around!!

Any fair reading of her post would indicate that she is suggesting that misogyny and sexual harassment is the norm (i.e. the rule) and is perpetrated by the majority (“not the exception”).

optogirl

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Here’s her post (again):

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

She is not in any way suggesting it is a ‘small number of men’. She is stating that ‘it’s the rule’ for her and her friends to be sexually harassed on an almost daily basis - not the exception, the rule.

It is was the same few men, then they are certainly getting around!!

Any fair reading of her post would indicate that she is suggesting that misogyny and sexual harassment is the norm (i.e. the rule) and is perpetrated by the majority (“not the exception”).

yes, the rule is in relation to the women, not the men. Your reading of this is not what the poster intended. Unfortunately she is right - most women HAVE experienced, at the very least, sexual harassment.

Deusexmachina

seamus wrote: »

Indeed, it's like saying, "You can't walk down Grafton Street without being constantly harrassed by chuggers". That doesn't men that everyone on Grafton St is a chugger, in fact there may only be 10 or 20 of them on the street. But there are enough of them to make the process of trying to walk down the street an ordeal.

Now it’s not. She stated that sexual harassment is experienced by her and her friends on an almost daily basis. It’s is the rule, not the exception.

Read what she wrote and try to be objective.

Deusexmachina

optogirl wrote: »

yes, the rule is in relation to the women, not the men. Your reading of this is not what the poster intended. Unfortunately she is right - most women HAVE experienced, at the very least, sexual harassment.

Have you discussed this with her? I atotally accept that most women have experienced sexual harassment - it’s disgusting.
But she wrote ‘on an almost daily basis- it’s the rule not the exception”

optogirl

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Now it’s not. She stated that sexual harassment is experienced by her and her friends on an almost daily basis. It’s is the rule, not the exception.

Read what she wrote and try to be objective.

You are the only person so far to take that meaning from it so perhaps you are wrong?

Deusexmachina

optogirl wrote: »

You are the only person so far to take that meaning from it so perhaps you are wrong?

I am only reading what she wrote. To be fair, I was very sympathetic to her in another post - I hate that she is suffering this.

But I’m not going to accept that sexual harassment on an almost daily basis is the rule not the exception.

Arghus

Deusexmachina wrote: »

Now it’s not. She stated that sexual harassment is experienced by her and her friends on an almost daily basis. It’s is the rule, not the exception.

Read what she wrote and try to be objective.

Yes, sexual harassment. She didn't say that all men sexually harass.

Deusexmachina

Arghus wrote: »

Yes, sexual harassment. She didn't say that all men sexually harass.

No. She said that she experiences sexual harassment and misogyny on an almost daily basis - and so do her friends.

What are we supposed to conclude by that? ‘It’s not the exception, it’s the rule’.

The only honest conclusion one could draw is that this is ubiquitous and that a huge amount of men are involved - ‘it’s not the exception, it’s the rule’.

optogirl

Deusexmachina wrote: »

I am only reading what she wrote. To be fair, I was very sympathetic to her in another post - I hate that she is suffering this.

But I’m not going to accept that sexual harassment on an almost daily basis is the rule not the exception.

I'm sure not for every woman, every day, but for most women, a LOT of the time. There's a lot of belittling of what women are saying 'big deal you had your arse felt - it's not rape', 'big deal a builder shouted at you, in a way it's a compliment', 'big deal - a manager commented on your looks - you've never discussed how a fella looks with someone?' etc etc etc.

It is tiring & relentless and until very recently I think, something that most women felt we just had to accept. Now, with the amount of women standing up and saying WE DON'T LIKE THIS and telling their stories, we realise we actually don't have to put up with this.

I don't think men really understand how intimidating it is to be harassed, even mildly, because the threat of something more sinister happening is there. It might indeed be just a 'bit of fun' but again, tens of thousands of women are now shouting that WE DON'T LIKE IT. We know most men are not sexual predators, of course not, but I think even a lot of very decent men are realising that talking about women in a reductive way, touching women when it's not invited etc etc are not acceptable in a way that they've never really thought about before. Happily it's a learning curve most are happy to go on. Women are learning too and perhaps for future generations it will be less of an issue.

Arghus

Deusexmachina wrote: »

No. She said that she experiences sexual harassment and misogyny on an almost daily basis - and so do her friends.

What are we supposed to conclude by that? ‘It’s not the exception, it’s the rule’.

The only honest conclusion one could draw is that this is ubiquitous and that a huge amount of men are involved - ‘it’s not the exception, it’s the rule’.

I give up.

seamus

Deusexmachina wrote: »

No. She said that she experiences sexual harassment and misogyny on an almost daily basis - and so do her friends.

What are we supposed to conclude by that? ‘It’s not the exception, it’s the rule’.

That, "On a daily basis she experiences harassment and misogyny", and days that she doesn't are the exception.

I think you're the one who needs to read it objectively. You're jumping to a conclusion that doesn't logically follow.

iodd7

Its a bit rubbish that the new Director (a woman) has to clean up the mess while MC goes off with presumably a huge pension. Are there any legal avenues those women who were harrassed by him can go down?

Old Perry

Reeling in the years 2017 will be seriously depressing

midlandsmissus

optogirl wrote: »

I'm sure not for every woman, every day, but for most women, a LOT of the time. There's a lot of belittling of what women are saying 'big deal you had your arse felt - it's not rape', 'big deal a builder shouted at you, in a way it's a compliment', 'big deal - a manager commented on your looks - you've never discussed how a fella looks with someone?' etc etc etc.

It is tiring & relentless and until very recently I think, something that most women felt we just had to accept. Now, with the amount of women standing up and saying WE DON'T LIKE THIS and telling their stories, we realise we actually don't have to put up with this.

I don't think men really understand how intimidating it is to be harassed, even mildly, because the threat of something more sinister happening is there. It might indeed be just a 'bit of fun' but again, tens of thousands of women are now shouting that WE DON'T LIKE IT. We know most men are not sexual predators, of course not, but I think even a lot of very decent men are realising that talking about women in a reductive way, touching women when it's not invited etc etc are not acceptable in a way that they've never really thought about before. Happily it's a learning curve most are happy to go on. Women are learning too and perhaps for future generations it will be less of an issue.

Very well said Optogirl

Shurimgreat

Caranica wrote: »

I am a woman and barely a day goes by without misogyny and sexual harassment. Funnily enough I also have female friends and they all say the same. It's not the exception, it's the rule.

Can you quote some instances of sexual harassment you experienced today, yesterday or even in the last week?

Outlaw Pete

optogirl wrote: »

It is tiring & relentless and until very recently I think, something that most women felt we just had to accept. Now, with the amount of women standing up and saying WE DON'T LIKE THIS and telling their stories, we realise we actually don't have to put up with this.

You're being naive.

The kind of arsehat that whistles at women in the street and grabs their arse as they walk past them in a pub, couldn't give a fcuk if you stand up and say "WE DON'T LIKE THIS" in your billions. In fact, it might even make them more likely to engage in such behavior. It's akin to men all hashtagging about aggressive behavior from other men and saying we've had enough and WE DON'T LIKE IT!! Won't make a lick of difference.

Be honest. This #metoo nonsense is not a means to an end. The truth is that victimhood has never been as fashionable. Social media is being used as a catwalk.