women's march

Discussion in 'Politics' started by sculptor, Jan 20, 2018.

  1. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Whenever they assert a desire to debate the relative impact and appropriate punishment for various kinds of sexual harassment and assault. Granted, this happens more often on the internet than face to face.

    Surely you are not implying that birch does not want to have a discussion on these topics - are you?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,884
    I actually reject your question for its irresponsible lack of definition. You know how easily I can answer you? Here, try this: They are among ones you don't hear about. Someone says something wrong, gets called out, acknowledges it, corrects behavior.

    In the Eighties there was a bit about the Satanist next door, that you wouldn't necessarily know the perfectly wonderful people you played Canasta with each Thursday night were Satanists, unless they told you, and they weren't going to tell you unless they asked. Its context was the period when Christianists wanted people freaking out about Satanism in rock music, and Geraldo Rivera hosting a prime-time special on the subject. Many are watching, closely, to see if the New York Times is really going there with their next-door-Nazi puff coverage.

    There are even more complicated versions of resolution, because it gets more complicated when someone does, instead of says, but that's the thing, resolutions require everyone involved to do their part, and there comes a point at which that all depends on how the accused responds to being called out. Meanwhile, you're also not hearing about a whole lot of what is going on because our society works to keep a bunch of it quiet in order to protect harassers, abusers, and assailants.

    So, for starters, I'm going to go with that: There are incidents you just won't hear about because they get resolved appropriately. And even if they are a minority of cases, it's still a large raw number.

    You can be as vague and suggestive as you want; there just isn't much anyone can do to help you if you can't commit to something more particular, and it's also true that if you look around, sometimes the lack of resolution about such laments seems to be the point. Start with the really extreme: Hey, do you think MSU and and USGA knew about Doctor Rapist? I mean, USGA board members are stepping down. I wonder what took so long to catch on; I mean, why would three USGA board members be stepping down? While the rapist might have received due process, I'm just going to run with the victim count, the fact of people scrambling to cover their liability, and the period over which this predator operated, and suggest that maybe people should have paid more attention to some of the talk much earlier than they did, but, hey, since nothing was being done it must not be true, right? Next up: NBC News? Matt Lauer? They knew about the locks. They heard the rumors. They knew when his assistant called for medical assistance. Yes, the company knew. Weinstein Company? They helped cover it up. Congress? The process is designed to keep these cases out of court. How about the state legislator who killed himself after investigative reporters↗ dug up an old molestation complaint and colleagues suggested he step down? Well, his entire world was coming apart, but his suicide note pointed directly at the molestation accusation; his own excuse for the behavior was that someone drugged him; the police never really followed up on the teenage victim's claim; they classified the allegation wrong with the result of underinvestigating, never interviewed the suspect, and closed the file under a false claim that the victim told them to. Had police followed up at the time, would the preacher have been elected to the legislature? Would he be able to fly under the radar as merely an extravagant preacher? Would investigative reporters have stayed away if he hadn't been elected to public office, or was the state of the church itself enough to kindle and stoke that investigative curiosity? Would they only have started digging again in the glare of #MeToo? We don't know, and sure, it kind of sounds like his election might have renewed scrutiny, but here's the thing: How many cases would you like me to go through? Because you can just hang out in your vagary and complain that you're not satisfied, yet.

    And, you know, that's not exactly a useful way of going about whatever it is you think you're doing, unless of course the point is to be disruptive.

    Yes, you are missing certain aspects of reality. More specifically: Do you see the word "seems" in your explanation? That is a problematic word; what seems does not necessarily equal what is. Perhaps the word "all"? That, too, is your own projection, as your particular prerequisites have yet to be satisfied.

    I don't know—

    And, yes, when we sort through the data in order to understand the behavioral continuum of sexual violence in society, there will be important differences to note. However, when the question is sexually predatory behavior in the workplace, groping her at the office or during a photo op in the field is still predatory behavior, and the fact that he isn't trying to rape her in his car when she is fourteen means precisely nothing as a comparison.

    (#3492704/194, 14 December 2017↗)

    —sometimes it goes by quickly, and maybe that's the problem. Perhaps it isn't prominent enough to satisfy your demand. Maybe you are unsatisfied with the phrasing.

    And just like there is a time and place for consensual partners to complicate such questions by consenting to violence, so also is there a time and place for parsing the difference between the Minnesota Groper and What Goes On In Alabama. There are times, for instance, when we aim to diagnose the behavior in order to disrupt it; this is a question both of human rights and public health and safety. And during these times, yes, it is helpful to know the difference between the guy who strangles 'em out, the guy who uses his office to create duress for picking up underage girls, and the guy who, for instance, seems at best to simply fail to understand that women's bodies are in fact human beings and therefore have their own rights. The connection, though, is the fact of predatory behavior.

    (#3492905/216, 15 December 2017↗)

    And that?

    And then, going forward, I don't know, what's the framework, here, for your satisfaction? Should I repost these in every iteration of these threads as this calamity tumbles along? Once a month, wherever the discussion happens to be, maybe? I mean, y'know, since we could be at this for a while? Once a week, just to make sure? Or, more directly: Would you like to know what I really think of your demands?

    †​

    There is also this, though: Certainly, 'tis a depressing read, but there actually is some sequence to how this has gone; the discourse might evolve poorly, but it does evolve. It might be helpful to recall a well-known, reliable statistic about how people prejudicially refuse to trust women; it even goes so far that all they need is to think you're a woman, and they judge you more harshly. Because it is worth noting that your vague hinting about factionalization and inference↑ depends in no small part on the effective reality of audiences defining on sentiment and not the actual record. And you are also, in your pretense, forgetting that the "faction", as you and others would have it, including the two women and a queer is already well-acquainted with that reality.

    Can I at least suggest that any time you feel that itch to thread the middle, it might be helpful to take a moment to familiarize yourself with what you're getting in between? Because, yeah, certes, 'tis a depressing read, but Sisters know what they're doing, and where you might think you're seeking some concession to rationality, you are effectively advancing irrationality.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Dunlop, R. G. and Jacob Ryan. "The Pope's Long Con". Kentucky Center for Investigative Reporting. 11 December 2017. LongCon.KYCIR.org. 24 January 2018. http://bit.ly/2AXux9Q
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    No, I don't.
    Total word salad. The only conclusion I can reach based on this and the subsequent post is that you are totally unable or unwilling to have a go at answering the questions.

    Whether I have sympathy (or empathy) for your experiences is a totally separate issue and means relatively little for the purposes of this discussion. It is merely another anecdote. If you are not able to proceed because of these past experiences simply state such and I will do my best to ignore you.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    the point was clear.

    you are that deluded that you think i'm supposed to establish boundaries of public social conduct for you? are you high? or just stupid?

    you are the one peculiarly making it personal as if i'm supposed to define social boundaries for women the world over for you specifically and how to engage them? as well as do your homework about what is legal and illegal? laughable.

    you are illogical and all over the place on this thread. where have i posted an anecdote on this thread? and even if i did or were to, what does that have to do with my point? otoh, you expect me to personally define rules for you.

    absolutely nuts.

    oh hell no. i've already delineated some appropriate punishment, you have not. neither have you debated this topic in good faith because you are weaseling out from putting forth your own opinions on appropriate punishment for various offenses.

    be careful who you underestimate. stop being a coward and face the music. express your own stand and opinion besides expecting everyone else to.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2018
  8. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    I have not yet read the entirety of your post but I wanted to mention this: I'm glad you included "among" in that reply - else it would reduce to "see no evil" and I'm sure that's not what you mean.

    OTH, you do seem to be categorically excluding the converse - such that, if we hear about it, then it warrants "public humiliation, degradation along with loss of career and social standing." At least if you are replying in context of my post. Yes?

    And that's kind of the whole point...
     
  9. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    The entire criminal justice system (not that I'm a fan) is based on just that premise. I will take this post as a reply in the affirmative - you are totally unable or unwilling to have a go at answering the questions. Which is fine...
     
  10. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Marcia Langdon commented on Greer's views of Aboriginal men. And she was brutal. With good reason.

    Greer is a bigot.

    Except:

    Gender-based street harassment is unwanted comments, gestures, and actions forced on a stranger in a public place without their consent and is directed at them because of their actual or perceived sex, gender, gender expression, or sexual orientation.

    Street harassment includes unwanted whistling, leering, sexist, homophobic or transphobic slurs, persistent requests for someone’s name, number or destination after they’ve said no, sexual names, comments and demands, following, flashing, public masturbation, groping, sexual assault, and rape.

    It was and is harassment.

    A perusal of that thread showed incredulity from the majority who were responding to you, paddoboy.

    When you make light of street harassment and make a stunning claim:

    Despite all evidence to the contrary, when people question that, it isn't because they misinterpreted what you said.

    You mean like Lolita?

    And do you want to go there when you have the film industry fawning over male abusers of young girls, like Woody Allen and Roman Polanski?
     
  11. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    bs. i'm not doing your homework and research for you.
     
  12. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    The idea seems pretty simple - sexual harassment presents as a continuum. Very few things are truly binary and human behavior ain't one of them.

    If that is a true statement, and it is coupled with desire for repercussion when harassment occurs (somehow I don't think there will be any argument on that point) then we should be able to discuss whether all forms of harassment (including sexual assault) are deserving of the same consequences. If they are not, then some forms deserve harsher penalties - others not so much.

    Are any of you able to take a stab at quantifying this? Or shall we all just throw up hands and say whomever had whatever coming to them and whatever happened was totally justified - because, you know, it happened.
     
  13. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Translated: I am unable or unwilling to put forth any ideas for discussion nor do I have any input on the subject. Got it.
     
  14. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    I fully and completely agree with this. The manner in which the accused responds is a definite clue and one I think most people use when ascribing guilt. Probably not the be all, end all though - or shouldn't anyway.

    Responding as I digest...
     
  15. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    Once again, I happen to agree with these assertions. I have no way of knowing, but I still agree. To the pertinent bit - "The process is designed to keep these cases out of court" - I would answer: The process needs to be changed.

    It should go without saying that this change will require a national (or worldwide) discussion, with the least amount of wailing and histrionics as humanly possible. The conversation is occurring - not so sure about the second part.
     
  16. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    perhaps you have comprehension difficulty or more like cognitive dissonance. repeat: i did delieanate what is appropriate punishment regarding various levels of sexual harassment and assault.

    all you do is expect people to spoon feed you on this thread.
     
  17. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    And also a recognised mouth piece for feminism.
    I stand by my claim that most sensible women, would not really take too much exception to wolf whistling and some may even welcome it as per my example.
    It's also wrong to walk across the road outside of provided pedestrian crossings, and to maybe drop someone off just for a minute at a bus stop or other no parking area, yet we all do it, including yourself I suggest.
    I certainly took no exception to being slapped on the arse and told "nice one" In fact I welcomed it!
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    I missed that. What do you believe is a fitting punishment for men on a building site that wolf whistled a female walking by?
    How about a women slapping a bloke on the arse and saying, "nice one?"
     
  19. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    That would seem sufficient for preliminary discussion.
    I have absolutely zero intention of doing so. My goal is to refocus these threads towards finding common ground - not stonewalling.

    Ambitious, I know...
     
  20. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    You said women in general - most women - don't mind catcalls and wolf whistles on the public street. You said they treated it with "hilarity" and appreciation - every day, five times a day, day in and day out, for years, hilarity and appreciation.
    You also - right next to that - listed among the biological differences between men and women that women don't have hair in their armpits, and in response to mild mockery altered that to asserting all self-respecting women remove the hair from their armpits.

    And so forth. No word on how you think that would play as a standup routine delivered to the women at the March this year.
     
  21. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    oh brother...

    obviously, there isn't one, legally. as to woman slapping him on the arse, it depends on where it takes place, doesn't it? at work, you can escalate it to human resources if they don't stop the behavior once you've made it clear it's inappropriate. in a store, call management. in school, report it to the principal, in a bar, inform management etc a neighbor, stay the hell away. if they seek you out to harass you, then call police.
     
  22. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    That seems a bit harsh T - especially when I specifically asked for examples of exceptions. These examples are much harder to come up with, in light of the fact that we will never hear about them. By your own definition.

    I know this is the internet and "civilized" is rarely a term used when describing forum interaction. But, one can hope. Perhaps it is true - maybe there are all sorts and varieties of sexual harassment that don't deserve execution - or even incarceration or termination of employment. Where is this line? If you were HR Director for Worldwide widgets, how would you write policy? When would it be appropriate to refer the issue for criminal prosecution?

    If we had any sort of consensus on these issues it might then make sense to discuss current events - and whether Mr. XYZ deserved what he got. Until then, not so much...
     
  23. Randwolf Ignorance killed the cat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,201
    My apologies - missed this post, six weeks ago, in another thread. Pretty spot on: "groping her at the office or during a photo op in the field is still predatory behavior, and the fact that he isn't trying to rape her in his car when she is fourteen means precisely nothing as a comparison."

    What though, does mean something as a comparison? We are still left at this point to throw all work place harassment in the same bucket, even if it's not equivalent to Roy Moore.
     

Share This Page