How 'MeToo' is exposing the scale of sexual abuse

[Fluffernut]

I was talking about the other person's scenario and how he introduced the "Call the authorities" alternative.

And yeah, pretty sure things like "Sell your body to continue in your career?" are pretty black and white.

- - - Updated - - -



I think you misunderstood me. My point is exactly that calling the authorities is not an answer to the dillema of "Have sex to continue your career or lose all your career and dreams but retain your dignity".

Is this a personal scenario where you (as creator of said scenario) have decided those are the only two options?

[Saucexorzski]

So when is the Women's March for this going to happen?

[Kathandira]

So when is the Women's March for this going to happen?

Did you receive notice that there is one planned? Because I don't think there is supposed to be one. Sharing it around FB seems to have done a great job so far.

[Jessicka]

You can't have a moral dillema with a "Call the authorities and they solve everything" answer as an option.

The option of the guy shouldn't be trying this shit on in the first place should exist though. There shouldn't be space within any company structure for a someone setting up one on one interviews in their hotel room. The potential for abuse is so obvious, that it's obvious what's happening.

[Saucexorzski]

Did you receive notice that there is one planned? Because I don't think there is supposed to be one. Sharing it around FB seems to have done a great job so far.

Seems like this is a larger issue then the last one was about...why wouldn't there be one for this?

[Mistame]

Make no mistake, any woman that was actually forcibly assaulted/raped is a victim. But these cases of "he invited me to his room and got handsy so I left" are not. Just because a swat on the ass is "sexual assault" now doesn't change the fact that it wasn't that big of a deal a few decades ago. It seems to be a growing trend to judge the past by the standards of the present, but that's just an expression of ignorance. Something being "wrong" now doesn't necessarily mean it was "wrong" then and certainly doesn't entitle someone to some sort of recompense because standards have changed.

I've been sexually harassed. Here's the thing though: magnitude and persistence are both important. Also, sexual harassment and sexual assault are not the same thing, at all, and the article should not be conflating them.

Another thing to keep in mind is that humans live long lives. The chances that a human will experience a negative sexual interaction at some point in their lives is pretty high. So just saying 'me too' doesn't really give useful data on how widespread the problem is. Again, magnitude and persistence are important; and I'll add a third factor as well, which is repetition.

The reason I'm arguing a bit against the ideas presented in this article is because sexual harassment is a negative outcome to the generally positive process of courting. Men are expected to put themselves out there. Sometimes they'll do things that are not correct, but ultimately not terribly damaging unless you have the mental fortitude of a feather. That being said, we should try to encourage a culture that minimizes mistakes or bad strategies.

Well said.

This. I always hesitate to comment on these threads as it turns in to exactly this. If woman are silent, they are wrong. If they speak out, they are wrong. Maybe woman aren't the problem?

They're certainly not all innocent, either.

Coercion could be something like:

Employer: Do you want this job?
Applicant: Yes.
Employer: Will you have sex with me for the job?
Applicant: No.
Employer: Will you reconsider if I make some calls to other studios to soil your reputation?
Applicant: I guess I don't have much of a choice.

Right. No force/threat, no coercion.

Hahaha, no. That's absolutely not true.

In most civilized countries, it is. The exception does not change the rule.

To be clear, the Me Too movement is about anything from harassment, to sexual abuse, to rape. Anything where your sexual boundaries were breached without consent.

So basically, everyone should post it. Especially if using modern standards.

[Kathandira]

Seems like this is a larger issue then the last one was about...why wouldn't there be one for this?

Not a woman, couldn't really say. I am not in any position to tell women what is worth how much to them, or how they should speak out. All I can do is support them by listening and understanding.

- - - Updated - - -

Right. No force/threat, no coercion.

I'm not sure if you agree with me or not on this part. But just to be clear in case you don't agree.

"Employer: Will you reconsider if I make some calls to other studios to soil your reputation? "

That is coercion.

co·er·cion

the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats.

The threat here being ruining someone's career if they don't have sex with them.

[Saucexorzski]

Not a woman, couldn't really say. I am not in any position to tell women what is worth how much to them, or how they should speak out.

Well then you should have just said you didn't know, geez.

[Mistame]

I'm not sure if you agree with me or not on this part. But just to be clear in case you don't agree.

I'm pointing out that your example is coercion because it involves a threat. But not being hired because you said no isn't.

[Kathandira]

Well then you should have just said you didn't know, geez.

Sorry, I replied in such a way because I took the way you asked as a snarky, "Oh yeah? Where is your women's march now?" As if this is being done half heartedly and not worth the effort.

Perhaps I read too much into it.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm point out that your example is coercion because it involves a threat. But not being hired because you said no isn't.

Threatening to call other studios to ruin someone's career is a threat the way I see it. I could agree that it is not a physical threat though. However the definition doesn't specify that it must be a physical threat.

[Heladys]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-41633857


MORE IN LINK

Normally I scoff at these sort of trends as nothing more than online narcissism BUT I can actually get behind this... People are ignorant on not only how common it is but the shame so many men and women feel who are victims of sexual abuse/assault. Too many feel they can't tell their story out of fear of judgment

It's got its ugly side as do most of these things: men coming out with their own #metoo expressions of solidarity are getting shit on because "this isn't about you".

[Mistame]

Threatening to call other studios to ruin someone's career is a threat the way I see it.

Um, I just said that it was.

[Witchblade77]

just becasue something is not sexual assault, doesn't somehow change that it IS harassment. ffs. no, the dude, who kept bothering me on the train didn't rape me. but it doesn't change the fact that he wouldn't fucking take no for a goddamn answer. THAT is the problem. TAKE A FUCKING NO FOR AN ANSWER. if someone asks you to stop talking to them? this is NOT a code word for "i must try harder" its a "STOP TALKING TO ME" harassment is continuing acting towards someone in a way that they asked you to stop.

moreover, using your power and influence to coerce someone into actions they would rather not do, doesn't excuse the coercion. ITS. NOT. OK. a person choosing to do something desperate out of desperation doesn't mean you are doing just fine, YOU ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THEIR CIRCUMSTANCES, KNOWING THAT THEY WOULDN'T HAVE DONE IT otherwise.

that so many people here are excusing it and accusing people being harassed instead for being in the wrong? is horrifying and EXACTLY the problem

edited to add. and btw, because this IS personal I only shared a single experience out of many, this being the experience I'm willing to share because its one of the more minor ones. becasue even with support of #metoo opening yourself up to even more harassment of the "it was your own fault for existing when they could see you" is just pouring salt on the wounds.

[LiiLoSNK]

#MeToo

Sloth from The Goonies grabbed my ass one time. So traumatic.

[Kathandira]

Um, I just said that it was.

Whoops! I misread it all from the start then. Which I should have second guessed my interpretation of what you said since you are typical on the side of supporting women in these sorts of things.

[Super Kami Dende]

Seeing as he's one of the people who's taken advantage of it, there's no reason to exclude him from the topic. No matter how badly you want a turn on his cock, which is the only explanation I can come up with for your last comment.

Which would make sense if that is what he brought to the topic, not more of the Russia nonsense.

[bewbew]

Is this a personal scenario where you (as creator of said scenario) have decided those are the only two options?

All the other options but this very rigid scenario appeal not to the agent's capability for decision, even a costly yet correct one, but instead to some greater power to sweep by and remove the scenario from existance or in some way or another punish the person proposing for daring to make the proposition, while the offered party is completly passive and incapable of making a deliberation regarding his own circunstances.

He is not even the one to point the wrong in the other party - it is some other agent (The government, the business standards, whatever).

The point of a rigid scenario is to put the proposed person back in the spotlight it deserves.

[Mistame]

Whoops! I misread it all from the start then. Which I should have second guessed my interpretation of what you said since you are typical on the side of supporting women in these sorts of things.

I was merely pointing out the difference between actual coercion and what some people seem to be calling "coercion". Using a supposed position of power isn't "coercion" unless it involves a threat (or force). The difference being, for example, "He said he'd ruin my career if I didn't..." vs "I felt like he could ruin my career if I didn't..."

[Fluffernut]

All the other options but this very rigid scenario appeal not to the agent's capability for decision, even a costly yet correct one, but instead to some greater power to sweep by and remove the scenario from existance or in some way or another punish the person proposing for daring to make the proposition, while the offered party is completly passive and incapable of making a deliberation regarding his own circunstances.

He is not even the one to point the wrong in the other party - it is some other agent (The government, the business standards, whatever).

The point of a rigid scenario is to put the proposed person back in the spotlight it deserves.

A very verbose reply for a very simple question. If I am reading the delightful run-on correctly, you have created a scenario separate from the harassment/abuse conversation. In this created scenario, you are only giving two options - correct? Fully realizing that this scenario you have created is not something that would happen in the real world as there are multiple choices and reactions to any given situation.

[Kathandira]

I was merely pointing out the difference between actual coercion and what some people seem to be calling "coercion". Using a supposed position of power isn't "coercion" unless it involves a threat. The difference being, for example, "He said he'd ruin my career if I didn't..." and "I felt like he could ruin my career if I didn't..."

Makes sense.

Though this brings something to mind that happens with young women. A young woman (we'll say she is not physically active) is alone with a jock who is pushing up on her for sex. I have heard from women who have been in this situation who were afraid to say no because he was bigger than them, and intimidating. Even if they are sheepish about it, not really jumping at the chance to have sex, they will allow it to happen out of fear of being physically forced into it.

How is that categorized? I personally know a couple women who were in this situation when they were really young.

[This is not a gotcha thing or anything like that in case anyone is offended by the question. I am genuinely curious how that is perceived in the context of harassment/sexual abuse/rape]