#MeToo’ism and the age of sexual victimization.

[Jed_]

As the OP, the topic of this thread is the sexual harassment and victimization of women.  Leave it to PN to make it about himself, and derail the thread with a debate about a neighborhood girl putting her hand in his pants (real life stories about childhood sexual activities, another no-no).  As I have observed in threads about race relations and intermarriage, the kneeling controversy, Harvey Weinstein, the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame, and elsewhere, PN has a very self  centric viewpoint, where everyone else’s comments and experiences are only valid if they correspond with his own.  I’d call him a troll, but I don’t think that is his intent.  He’s likely just a grumpy old man. 

The current resident of the White House has set the bar pretty low for self centric behavior.

[MissBarbara]

The ‘mania’ as just described has had me worry some that metoo-ism might become trendy if it hasn’t already with many desiring to jump on the bandwagon.  I can imagine a woman seeing a male coworker glance at her cleavage thinking ‘Ah ha!  I’ve just been harassed!’ when perhaps all he was thinking was that her outfit seemed inappropriate at work.

Here's the point: The problem with these accusations -- and it is a real problem -- is also an opportunity. In many instances, we don't know for certain, and likely never know for certain, if the alleged abuse/assault actually took place. But #MeToo'ism has had one vital effect: It has clearly encouraged women who suffered real, actual abuse to come forward, where they otherwise might have been disinclined, for a number of reasons, to do so. And, absent concrete evidence of abuse/assault, a preponderance of consistent accusations helps determine that actual abuse/assault did, in fact, take place.

While I cringed a little at your line about an outfit being "inappropriate," I agree with your point. Above I tried to limn the difference between bullying and sexual assault, and now I'd like to further limn a difference between workplace sexual harassment and sexual abuse/assault. I think this difference is vital in both understanding and solving this problem.

To use your example, an office worker who stares at a co-workers cleavage is doing something inappropriate, something proscribed, in most places of employment, by workplace rules. He's also guilty of crudeness, disrespect, objectification, and the like. A worker, usually someone in a higher position than the victim, who commits sexual abuse/assault is guilty of a crime, regardless of whether the statute of limitations for that crime has expired. Even when a worker or underling feels compelled to give in to his advances, and willingly commits a sex act with him, is still guilty of a crime.

In other words, I agree that there's a potential for an accusation of workplace sexual harassment to be the result of a misinterpretation, or a flat-out mistake. But hopefully the appropriate person at that workplace will bear this in mind when considering the accusation, and in many cases, I think it is.

[Jed_]

Perhaps unlike many workplaces, I’ve actually received sexual harassment training going back to the early 1990’s  I recall one of the early sessions I attended where a company lawyer essentially said the bar goes to the level of the accuser.  If the accuser feels sexually harassed (and is being truthful about what happened), well then they were sexually harassed.

The question then becomes, if it’s a simple misunderstanding, then get it out in the open and take steps to prevent future occurrences.

That said, it is really fucking hard not to have your eyes linger on some nice cleavage.

[Levorotatory]

... -- given the topic of this thread -- a line needs to be drawn between sexual harassment/sexual assault and bullying. Both can be equally pernicious, and both can have long-lasting, even permanent effects on the victim. But in terms of discussing the crisis at hand, and, more to the point, seeking effective solutions to solve the problem, conflating the two only serves to obscure the problem, and keep real solutions form being found and put into effect.

Curious as to the reasoning for the suggestion to draw a line between bullying and sexual harassment.  Both are forms of abusive behavior, rooted in a power imbalance or a desire to generate a power imbalance.  Couldn't sexual harassment be considered a subset of bullying behavior that happens to be sexually directed?  

[Katiebee]

Perhaps. The issue is that unlike bullying, it is directed very consciously against a particular class of people, consistently, and the form it takes is often excused and the victim is often blamed.

[MissBarbara]

... -- given the topic of this thread -- a line needs to be drawn between sexual harassment/sexual assault and bullying. Both can be equally pernicious, and both can have long-lasting, even permanent effects on the victim. But in terms of discussing the crisis at hand, and, more to the point, seeking effective solutions to solve the problem, conflating the two only serves to obscure the problem, and keep real solutions form being found and put into effect.

Curious as to the reasoning for the suggestion to draw a line between bullying and sexual harassment.  Both are forms of abusive behavior, rooted in a power imbalance or a desire to generate a power imbalance.  Couldn't sexual harassment be considered a subset of bullying behavior that happens to be sexually directed?  

Yes, I suppose sexual harassment is a form of bullying.

But, as I noted above, there's a difference between sexual harassment and sexual assault, between an inappropriate action and a criminal action.

Consider three different scenarios: A co-worker, or a boss, who ogles a woman's breasts or butt, or who makes untoward comments about a woman's figure or outfit; a co-worker or boss who touches inappropriately, or or who takes sexual suggestion to a personal level; and a co-worker or boss -- and usually a person in a position over the victim -- who forces, through actions or words compelling the victim to submit (you'll lose your job, you'll never work in this industry again, etc.) to a sexual act of one form or another.

Note the phrase "sexual victimization" in the subject line of this thread. All three are forms of "sexual victimization," and all three are "inappropriate," but there's a clear difference of severity between the three. The focus of the #MeToo campaign is chiefly on the third scenario I mentioned above, and for good reason. It's like a line drawn in the sand, it's a way to encourage women who have been victims of this type of assault to speak out, and it's a way to engender an overall social intolerance for this type of behavior.

It's clear, assuming the accusations to be true, that "this has been going on for years." And some of the instances alleged by the victims happened years or even decades ago. It's also clear that his campaign has had the very positive effect of making women feel comfortable coming forward, even about incidents that occurred a long time ago. And, best of all, I think it truly has begun to generate a positive social intolerance for this type of behavior.

 

[Lois]

... -- given the topic of this thread -- a line needs to be drawn between sexual harassment/sexual assault and bullying. Both can be equally pernicious, and both can have long-lasting, even permanent effects on the victim. But in terms of discussing the crisis at hand, and, more to the point, seeking effective solutions to solve the problem, conflating the two only serves to obscure the problem, and keep real solutions form being found and put into effect.

Curious as to the reasoning for the suggestion to draw a line between bullying and sexual harassment.  Both are forms of abusive behavior, rooted in a power imbalance or a desire to generate a power imbalance.  Couldn't sexual harassment be considered a subset of bullying behavior that happens to be sexually directed?  

Good observation.

It is said that rape is not about sex, but about power.  All the more reason to stop children from bullying and raise them to have empathy for others.  Today's bully maybe tomorrow's sexual harasser/predator.

[Levorotatory]

Yes, I suppose sexual harassment is a form of bullying.

But, as I noted above, there's a difference between sexual harassment and sexual assault, between an inappropriate action and a criminal action.

Consider three different scenarios: A co-worker, or a boss, who ogles a woman's breasts or butt, or who makes untoward comments about a woman's figure or outfit; a co-worker or boss who touches inappropriately, or or who takes sexual suggestion to a personal level; and a co-worker or boss -- and usually a person in a position over the victim -- who forces, through actions or words compelling the victim to submit (you'll lose your job, you'll never work in this industry again, etc.) to a sexual act of one form or another.

Note the phrase "sexual victimization" in the subject line of this thread. All three are forms of "sexual victimization," and all three are "inappropriate," but there's a clear difference of severity between the three. The focus of the #MeToo campaign is chiefly on the third scenario I mentioned above, and for good reason. It's like a line drawn in the sand, it's a way to encourage women who have been victims of this type of assault to speak out, and it's a way to engender an overall social intolerance for this type of behavior.

It's clear, assuming the accusations to be true, that "this has been going on for years." And some of the instances alleged by the victims happened years or even decades ago. It's also clear that his campaign has had the very positive effect of making women feel comfortable coming forward, even about incidents that occurred a long time ago. And, best of all, I think it truly has begun to generate a positive social intolerance for this type of behavior.

I can see your point about how non-sexual bullying among adults normally takes the form of psychological abuse and rarely proceeds to physical assault, with the bullies having learned in school that starting fights will quickly get them into trouble.  Curbing sexual assault in the same fashion would certainly be an improvement, but would still be only a partial solution that wouldn't stop the power games at the core of the problem.

 

[MissBarbara]

Yes, I suppose sexual harassment is a form of bullying.

But, as I noted above, there's a difference between sexual harassment and sexual assault, between an inappropriate action and a criminal action.

Consider three different scenarios: A co-worker, or a boss, who ogles a woman's breasts or butt, or who makes untoward comments about a woman's figure or outfit; a co-worker or boss who touches inappropriately, or or who takes sexual suggestion to a personal level; and a co-worker or boss -- and usually a person in a position over the victim -- who forces, through actions or words compelling the victim to submit (you'll lose your job, you'll never work in this industry again, etc.) to a sexual act of one form or another.

Note the phrase "sexual victimization" in the subject line of this thread. All three are forms of "sexual victimization," and all three are "inappropriate," but there's a clear difference of severity between the three. The focus of the #MeToo campaign is chiefly on the third scenario I mentioned above, and for good reason. It's like a line drawn in the sand, it's a way to encourage women who have been victims of this type of assault to speak out, and it's a way to engender an overall social intolerance for this type of behavior.

It's clear, assuming the accusations to be true, that "this has been going on for years." And some of the instances alleged by the victims happened years or even decades ago. It's also clear that his campaign has had the very positive effect of making women feel comfortable coming forward, even about incidents that occurred a long time ago. And, best of all, I think it truly has begun to generate a positive social intolerance for this type of behavior.

I can see your point about how non-sexual bullying among adults normally takes the form of psychological abuse and rarely proceeds to physical assault, with the bullies having learned in school that starting fights will quickly get them into trouble.  Curbing sexual assault in the same fashion would certainly be an improvement, but would still be only a partial solution that wouldn't stop the power games at the core of the problem.

 

You're right, and I agree.

But if this "crisis" creates a stronger and more widespread consensus that this behavior will not be tolerated, that will be a huge benefit.

It's like what's happened to racism. Yes, there are still racists among us, and yes, racists will still do resist things. But the overwhelming consensus in the U.S. today (well, outside the White House), is that racism will no longer be tolerated.

[_priapism]

It's like what's happened to racism. Yes, there are still racists among us, and yes, racists will still do resist things. But the overwhelming consensus in the U.S. today (well, outside the White House), is that racism will no longer be tolerated.

Except in law enforcement, education, wage equality, sentencing and imprisonment, representation in government, housing, health access, food access, and housing.  Otherwise, it’s hardly tolerated at all.

[MissBarbara]

It's like what's happened to racism. Yes, there are still racists among us, and yes, racists will still do resist things. But the overwhelming consensus in the U.S. today (well, outside the White House), is that racism will no longer be tolerated.

Except in law enforcement, education, wage equality, sentencing and imprisonment, representation in government, housing, health access, food access, and housing.  Otherwise, it’s hardly tolerated at all.

Yes, as I wrote that, I knew you or someone with your outlook would respond exactly like that.

Yet the plain fact is that overt racism is no longer tolerated by the American public at large. When's the last time you heard a pubic figure -- in politics, sports, entertainment, etc. -- use the word "nigger," and keep his or her job?

[Pervertedneighbor]

Sexual assault or sexual harassment or bullying, they are always unprovoked, unsolicited, and yes, in all cases the victim is blamed and shamed on purpose.  What good is the assault to the perpetrator if they do not make the victim feel degraded and responsible for the assault?  In the case of sexual harassment, the victim must certainly be made to feel responsible for all of the extracurricular attention. 

As for bullying, name it, bullies are everywhere and they are angry and they are going to take it out on you for things you say and do, acting like it's your fault for being who you are or for even breathing.  That starts in childhood.  I speak from personal experience on that one, as one who grew up trying to mind my own business, but that is all I will say about that.   This isn't about me.  It's about bullies in general.

I think bullying and sexual harassment can definitely cross lines, as in, "What are you gonna do about it?" or "You tell anyone, I can make trouble for you."  I would say that happens in both situations.

[Katiebee]

When you are able to react in an appropriate manner.



Way to go girl!

[_priapism]

Yes, as I wrote that, I knew you or someone with your outlook would respond exactly like that.

Truth isn’t an outlook, and elimination of the word “nigger” in public discourse is not the elimination of racism.  But you know that.

And this is the perfect thread to bring it up, because I believe, despite all the public hand wringing and apologies, things will largely go on unchanged by this.  The predators will just be more crafty.  Matt Lauer getting fired is not going to undo 200,000 years of male sexploitation and subjugation.  It will just drive it a little further underground, for now.

[MissBarbara]

Yes, as I wrote that, I knew you or someone with your outlook would respond exactly like that.

Truth isn’t an outlook, and elimination of the word “nigger” in public discourse is not the elimination of racism.  But you know that.

And this is the perfect thread to bring it up, because I believe, despite all the public hand wringing and apologies, things will largely go on unchanged by this.  The predators will just be more crafty.  Matt Lauer getting fired is not going to undo 200,000 years of male sexploitation and subjugation.  It will just drive it a little further underground, for now.

Liberal platitudes aren't necessarily truths, and rote repetition of liberal platitudes doesn't work toward a solution. Quite the contrary. But you know that.

I never said that racism has been eliminated; in fact I said exactly the opposite. Hiding behind liberal platitudes blinkers those who insist on blindly repeating them from seeing realities, and, more to the point, from recognizing progress. It's puzzled me for decades why this reaction is so prevalent on the Left, and it continues to puzzle me today. The elimination of he word "Nigger" and similar racial epithets from public discourse is a step forward, whether it fits your narrative or not.

I agree that Matt Lauer -- or Charlie Rose, or Louis C.K. or Kevin Spacey or whoever's the next guy -- getting fired is not going to undo 200,000 years of male sexploitation and subjugation. But the point that you clearly miss is that progress doesn't mean undoing the past, it means improving the present and the future.

So, sure, keep looking back and wagging your finger from your position of high moral authority. But I'd strongly advise you not to look forward from up there, or you'll see that the world is passing you by.




 

[_priapism]

That hurt.

[Lois]

[Pervertedneighbor]

Liberal platitudes aren't necessarily truths, and rote repetition of liberal platitudes doesn't work toward a solution. Quite the contrary. But you know that.

Isn't that the truth?

I used to have a friend.  If you asked him his position he would give it to you as if repeating it from a scrypt.

I would rather someone came at me with their own honest language, even if they were racist, sexist, homophobic pigs.  At least I would know they were not hiding behind some phony politically correct language.

[Lois]

Just who are you quoting?  When you don't give the source, it indicates shame in that source.

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.”

― John F. Kennedy, Profiles in Courage

[Pervertedneighbor]

Sorry, quoting Miss Barbara's last post.