Discussion in 'EtcetEra' started by Birdseye, Jan 9, 2018.
To say that there is an ongoing "witch-hunt" is an exaggeration, to put it mildly.
This reminds me of the IGN incident some months ago...
Probably already been said, but I believe the problem has always been the power dynamic. That someone in a position like Weinstein can't just "try to steal a kiss" as if he's in a more-or-less equal relationship with the women he courts. When he or people like him do that to people that depend on him directly or indirectly to succeed in the industry, any such attempt is coercive and abusive.
First I thought 'she doesn't get it but whatever, her opinion'
However, the more I see her action reinforces patriarchal thinking in people and enforcing the things people fought years to address...I really can't think of her action as something else than one of a piece of shit egoist.
She almost had a salient point when she was talking about equating clumsy flirtations as sexual assault, but then she immediately undermined that point by stating that "trying to steal a kiss"--which implies nonconsent--is not on the level of sexual assault. She seems confused on the issue at large and it would be in her benefit to read more about it. I'm not surprised that most of the women who signed the petition skew older as well. That being said, I don't entirely fault her for holding some retrograde and hypocritical views on feminism when she was conditioned to hold misogynistic beliefs about herself from an early age; I hope that she will come around one day because these conversations are good to have.
She never defended Weinstein.
Agree with the letter on a number of things.
anything is sexual harassment/assault by their standards.
Given this thread though I guess they were somewhat successful at making people believe that men's lives are ruined left and right because of harmless flirting and crazy man-hating feminists.
I agree with many of her points.
Every situation requires discretion.
I dunno how a person is supposed to figure that out, I can only speak for myself.
Certain points when taken alone were not controversial, she just diminished them through her conflicting views on the same subjects.
Interesting article. She has good points, but the fact that she defended Polanski in the past makes her collective less credible.
Pretty funny when people are calling her out for defending Polanski when you see who sign a petition defending him in Hollywood and other elites here and there...
France is still salty about Stross-Kahn. Allegations were dropped later on but it cost him his position as IMF director. Hence the political conspiracy theories
(I don’t know that people miss that pig tbh)
Yeah I've got a daughter and how dare these women perpetrate a world where a man is celebrated for unwanted advances for future women to inherit when for once the tide is moving in a decent direction. It's unfortunate that male dominance is so prevalent that they really believe what they are saying doesn't have toxic consequences, or they are just privileged enough to think they will never be put in a bad situation, I don't know.
My point of view is simple: no one is an automatic victim based solely on their gender, race or condition, since everyone has the potential to be a good or a bad person. This is what I meant by victim teams, given that the discourse I see in socially leftist sites like this where women, people of colour (I am a person of color, btw) and such are automatically given victim status and are happy to demonise "straight white men". This is not a useful narrative, it intends to separate and assign blame to a collective, when the responsibility of bad behaviours belongs to the person that commits the act. False accusations have existed, while some genuine ones have not been believed. They all require careful consideration.
The reason why is my second point: words are powerful and have consequences. They can destroy careers and even put people through the legal system, therefore it is my opinion that accusations need to be taken seriously, reasoned and analysed, instead of taken at face value. From what I could gather, the opinion of the french actress is exactly this, that taking all accusations at face value can have this effect. Nowhere have I seen in that paragraph that she's defending creeps like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey.
Third, I'm weary of social movements because they are always overly simplified and tend to be full of negative emotion (as you displayed above) rather than reasoning. I don't agree with all of her points, I personally don't think stealing a kiss is ok, but in the general sense, I don't think there is nothing wrong with flirting or trying to find if there's a romantic connection as long as there's respect and always observant of whether the other person is receptive, and if not, then respect their position and walk away. Of course that setting takes a role and the workplace is not the ideal one, and I have rarely if ever invited someone on a date at work, but on the other hand a lot of couples have met during work and families and relationships started that way. The problem with people like Weinstein and Spacey is that they abused their position within the industry, are incapable of taking no for an answer and lost the respect for people under them.
Now, if having the opinion above makes me a "monster" that "has his manly ego broken" because I can't "fuck my fuck objects", then so be it and I'll stop posting in this place.
We can use that to slander anyone.
But I remember the outrage when he was humiliated and handcuffed on TV. He was the head of IMF after all.Apparently a top political position is more important than someones deeds or character. An organisation that strives for the well being of countries
Nothing puritan about it. Actresses livelihoods were put on the line. Also you know what he did I would not consider sexual freedom, at all. Jesus is it that hard?
John Lasseter wasn't just accused of touching knees. He was accused of putting his hand on inner thighs and gradually creeping up.
As usual the truth lies somewhere in the middle of both arguments imo.
So fucking out of touch.
No there isn't some mythical middle ground
“Innocent” flirting is perfectly normal, and it almost always requires that men... just go for it (kiss, arm on shoulders etc etc) at some point, which obviously can lead to an uncomfortable situation if the woman isn’t attracted. That’s not sexual assault, that’s just how flirting works.
That’s exactly the message from Catherine Deneuve. In that sense, calling everything a sexual assault is a witch-hunt and it’s bizarre. Not sure how you can say she’s wrong honestly, unless you’ve never flirted in your life.
It goes without saying that people that use their position power to force women into sex are scum, and infact sexual predators.
There's no fucking witch hunt
Saying that you have an opinion does not legitimize it.
I'm not going to bother dissecting your "just go for it" sentence, because that's so lame it's not even worth it (especially because you lump in kissing as "just going for it"). You want to know who uses that justification? The president.
You've gotta be kidding me with this.
How about just the people who signed the fucking thing? You know, the ones defending a child rapist? And how is it slandering when it's, let's see... fucking TRUE. You're damn right they should be called to task for that.
You should be ashamed of this post, little breh.
Disagree with some points, others seem reasonable. Overall though, while I agree it shouldn’t be a witch hunt, the clear abuses of power now being questioned needs to happen and is long overdue. Particularly abuse that’s a lot more serious than miss-understood flirting.
Fuck though lots of posters clearly not reading the article at all.
That's the whole point of #MeToo. The stories told are almost all examples of men with power directly applicable to the woman in question either overtly exercising that power to force themselves on a woman, or letting the strong implication float in the air as they attempt to force themselves on a woman.
Here's a real easy guide: if it is anyone you see in a professional capacity it is inappropriate to flirt or pursue them. If you only ever meet people of the opposite sex in a professional capacity that's your fucking problem, not theirs. If you have a position of power over them it is especially wrong.
That's the problem Ms. Deneuve is omitting in her argument. These aren't women rebuffing a random man's advances and making a big deal out of it. These are women trying to have a career and having people of authority within that industry use that fact, consciously or subconcsiously, as a weapon against them.
Honestly a lot of these high profile situations that these women bring up are coming as a result to alledged harassment that happened in a workplace or related to business opportunities. The majority of the high profile individuals involved in these accusations exploited their positions of power in order to make unwanted advances or sexually assault co-workers or colleagues. I think it’s a little dishonest to believe that at the snap of an accusation that people are losing jobs or careers are completely ended. This letter doesn’t take into account internal investigations being a factor of these individuals losing their jobs. As far as certain people being blacklisted, this unfortunately is a result of the worst kept secrets in media and really a whole host of industries; these are boys clubs that have been complacent to this kind of behavior for decades. I don’t know how much of this is a witch hunt so much as people finally receiving some consequences for the exact kind of HR issues that I know at least I’m given training on every year as part of my company’s compliance program.
I don’t think anyone is saying that trying to flirt with a girl from across the bar is objectively bad, but suffocating advances and just the simple concept of “no means no” being ignored is really where a lot of this is coming from, especially when it’s in regard to a place where a modicum of professionalism is expected. Perhaps there’s a fine line between flirtatious and sleazy and certainly everyone’s definition is likely different. But the exploitation of power, station, or fame to engage in problematic behavior is wholly unacceptable in a professional environment.
No one is assigning automatic victim status on anyone. If someone comes forward with an accusation that someone has harassed or abused them, then yes, they are a victim. That said, it's not wrong to acknowledge the fact that stuff like racism and sexual harassment exist in a supermassive scale and that a majority of POC and women confront some level of harassing/abusive behaviour and that a big portion of especially the latter group are victims of straight (white) men. Acknowledging that there is an issue in how men are raised in our societies that makes this such a large scale, common (nigh) everyday issue for a lot of women is important. If men are such fucking snowflakes that they can't take some criticism and introspection, "am I feeding into this culture somehow", then that's men's problem, not the ones making the criticism.
None of these men that are being accused are being accused of just asking someone on a date or simple flirting, so making this a major point in the criticism of #metoo or current empowerment of victims of sexual harassment & rape is disingenuous and dumb. These are (often) serial rapists, systematic harassers and men who showcase otherwise problematic behaviour towards women. It's the kind of dumb shit that is used to try to delegitimise feminism. Make straw man arguments that very few or no feminists actually make. Act as if some minor issues are the major issues when no one has said anything about the minor issues.
"You know, I really enjoy our talks, wanna grab a cup of coffee/go to dinner on Friday?" is preferable to unwanted sexual comments and touching. Of course even then if you are, say, the boss of said person, you have to be careful with the situation. Want it or not, as the boss you have power over that person and you don't want to make it seem like the person's future is somehow affected if they say no or anything.