Has the #MeToo movement become a witch-hunt to a significant degree?

[PetraG]

Read what you posted again, they are being fired for job performance, and it’s meticulously document, not based on an outside allegation joe is habitually late, or one unverified customer complaint from the prior year that Joe was rude.

I already agreed the senate could fire him, THEY HAVE A PROCESS FOR IT.

But they didn’t follow the process, did they.

The voters can also fire a senator, but there wasn’t even a recall petition circulating for Franken on this issue, per my memory of the news.

Sen Bob Packwood of Oregon waited out the process for it and decided shortly before it came to a vote to resign. The same thing with Nixon, actually: he was never impeached. Based just on the allegations for which there is photographic evidence, I’m thinking Sen. Franken saw the writing on the wall and didn’t want his seat to be lost to the GOP because he waited too long to resign. Packwood’s case was kicked around for three years, and Franken is up for re-election in 2020.

As I said, though, resignation was actually his choice. Other office-holders stick it out and hope for a censure or a failure to take action. Bill Clinton, unlike Nixon, actually was impeached. In spite of having lied under oath, which it could be argued easily qualified as a high crime considering his office, he was not removed. (Was he even censured?)

I can understand why some people are angry that Sen. Franken felt he needed to resign. I have no idea what the evidence is on the Rob Porter resignation; it could be that he really does have a case to say that the allegations are entirely fabricated.

Al Franken, however, has left a trail of photographic evidence that he has a habit of letting his hands roam in ways that would get most people fired. The defense that he is a comedian reminds me of the senior tempter’s observation in The Screwtape Letters: “A thousand bawdy, or even blasphemous, jokes do not help towards a man’s damnation so much as his discovery that almost anything he wants to do can be done, not only without the disapproval but with the admiration of his fellows, if only it can get itself treated as a Joke.”

It is something of a relief that perhaps the day has come when this is no longer true in the Senate. I can understand why his partisans don’t want to see him turned out of public office, but I think a substitute with higher standards can be found. There are undoubtedly people suffering without much direct evidence of a habit of wrongdoing. Al Franken isn’t one of those people, sorry.

 

[PetraG]

Here is a real example.

Should she be fired because she got drunk and made a pass?

It was highly inappropriate, but no crime was committed.

  POLITICO

#MeToo movement lawmaker investigated for sexual misconduct allegations

California legislator cut national profile as activist against sexual harassment.

Personally, I might choose not to vote for her but I don’t think she should be fired unless the behavior continued, was serial in nature. I expect she will learn her lesson from this public rebuke.

I wouldn’t give her a pass because of the damage she might have done if she got behind the wheel of a car in that condition, would you? Anyone can do things that they might not have imagined possible the first time they’ve had too much to drink, but it is also 2018 and according to the story you cited it was not just once.

I don’t see any reason to make different rules for women who can’t keep their hands to themselves or different rules for someone who is obviously not on her first go-round with alcohol. When you have been around long enough to get elected to public office, “I was drunk” is a pathetic and unacceptable excuse. It might get you a mulligan if it happened when you were young and at your first office party, but that is not the situation she was in.

 

[Xantippe]

Speaking of “why didn’t they tell?”, it occurs to me that it was common in previous generations for men who were traumatized by combat to just never talk about their war experiences.

Avoiding talking about a terrible experience is very, very common as a coping device.

 

[TheHolyTrinity]

The are certainly a huge shift occurring.

 

[ATraveller]

Proof men can also be sexually harassed.

 

[DarkLight]

Yes, just as there are perfectly innocent people out there who side-hug children whom they used to give a full and innocent front-on hug, there are going to be some physical shows of affection at work that are going to be far less prevalent even if they are innocently meant. If you’ve ever had some superior who took liberties, though, it is a price you’re willing to pay, unfortunate as it is.

It occurs to me that there is also what some of us have referred to as “schroedinger’s boyfriend.” It’s not uncommon for those who do not in fact have purely friendly motives, to try to see how far they can take things and then indignantly claim they were only being friendly when called on it (especially if the lady is young and impressionable). Especially annoying if they continue the behavior afterwards.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Edmundus1581:

I’ll concede that’s an important point. Well spotted.

Perhaps the relevance of the “legality” of actions may apply to how long ago the alleged incident took place. The longer the passage of time, then the greater the magnitude of the offence, or the greater the number of offences, and the better the process required to punish someone now.

It is my great hope that this kind of offense, like offenses against children, is going to be less prevalent because those who took advantage of the likelihood that they wouldn’t be called on their behavior are going to know better.

Yes, just as there are perfectly innocent people out there who side-hug children whom they used to give a full and innocent front-on hug, there are going to be some physical shows of affection at work that are going to be far less prevalent even if they are innocently meant. If you’ve ever had some superior who took liberties, though, it is a price you’re willing to pay, unfortunate as it is.

“Yes, just as there are perfectly innocent people out there who side-hug children whom they used to give a full and innocent front-on hug,”

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

 

[pnewton]

What kind of state wouldn’t have assault and battery, or menacing, as a crime?

Texas. Terms vary. I tell you, what happened to this woman is illegal, but not criminal in Texas. It is a class-C misdemeanor and results in a fine. I have only been dealing with it 32 years. I know more than that website blurb with all those wishy-washy disclaimers.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

Yes. I’m a female teacher, and I’m very conscientious of physical contact with regard to my students.

 

[Theo520]

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

Yes, it doesn’t matter the sex of the teacher, certain displays of affection are no longer acceptable. The schools are the harbinger of what is happening. This doesn’t mean most mom’s won’t still hug the immediate neighbor kid in the usual fashion but times are changing.

More and more kids will get their adult connection from a fist bump rather than a hug of any sort.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

More and more kids will get their adult connection from a fist bump rather than a hug of any sort.

If one of my younger students wants a hug, I won’t push them away, but I won’t initiate one either. This might seem standoffish to you, but I’d rather be a standoffish teacher than a creepy one who gives unsolicited hugs.

 

[pnewton]

Edmundus1581:

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

Yes. I’m a female teacher, and I’m very conscientious of physical contact with regard to my students.

Nice answer. I like the way you worded it. My wife works with at risk kids of all types as a social worker in a high school. She has to be contentious, but that does not mean physical contact is forbidden, when she deems it appropriate. I do think the bar is difference for women than men, but that is probably prudent.

I am not a touchy person at all. I have hugged female subordinates, but to say I am contentious is an understatement. I have never initiated contact and all circumstances have been extreme. One can have deep affection for co-workers and maintain professionalism and propriety.

 

[Edmundus1581]

Edmundus1581:

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

Yes. I’m a female teacher, and I’m very conscientious of physical contact with regard to my students.

Yes, it doesn’t matter the sex of the teacher, certain displays of affection are no longer acceptable. The schools are the harbinger of what is happening. This doesn’t mean most mom’s won’t still hug the immediate neighbor kid in the usual fashion but times are changing.

More and more kids will get their adult connection from a fist bump rather than a hug of any sort.

Nice answer. I like the way you worded it. My wife works with at risk kids of all types as a social worker in a high school. She has to be contentious, but that does not mean physical contact is forbidden, when she deems it appropriate. I do think the bar is difference for women than men, but that is probably prudent.

I am not a touchy person at all. I have hugged female subordinates, but to say I am contentious is an understatement. I have never initiated contact and all circumstances have been extreme. One can have deep affection for co-workers and maintain professionalism and propriety.

Thanks for the replies and info.

 

[Xantippe]

One question. When you say “people”, do you both men and women? Are women now restraining their physical contact which children who are not their own, as much as men are?

I can’t speak for men, but here’s what I’ve done as a woman:

–when I taught overseas for the Peace Corps, I don’t think I ever touched a student
–I usually ask my kids before hugging them (although I do ruffle Middle Kid’s hair without asking–he is the least touch averse of my kids)
–Normally, I only touch other people’s little kids (even good friends’ kids) if they happen to be heading toward danger and I am the closest adult.
–Aside from child safety issues under discussion, I’m aware that a lot of small children value their personal space and squirm or squawk when grabbed or hugged, so I don’t hug little kids that aren’t mine, and I usually ask Baby Girl (age 5) if she wants to be hugged. (Yesterday, we had had words over a certain incident that resulted in her bedroom carpet needing to be shampooed, so she said no.)

 

[Xantippe]

Texas. Terms vary. I tell you, what happened to this woman is illegal, but not criminal in Texas. It is a class-C misdemeanor and results in a fine. I have only been dealing with it 32 years. I know more than that website blurb with all those wishy-washy disclaimers.

Speaking as a transplant to Texas, I’ll add that (based on my observations), Texans need a lot more personal space than people from some other parts of the country or some other parts of the world. I’m sometimes walking (and not even very close to somebody else and definitely not touching) and a passerby will say “sorry!” because their invisible personal comfort bubble has been violated.

Edited to add: I believe the ideal distance between two strangers here is probably at least arm’s length away.

 

[ConstantLearner]

If one of my younger students wants a hug, I won’t push them away, but I won’t initiate one either. This might seem standoffish to you, but I’d rather be a standoffish teacher than a creepy one who gives unsolicited hugs.

No, it doesn’t sound standoffish. Not in today’s society where so many are ready to accuse.

 

[Xantippe]

No, it doesn’t sound standoffish. Not in today’s society where so many are ready to accuse.

There’s also the issue that one doesn’t want kids to lose any natural reserve and get too used to being handled by relative strangers, or to develop the idea that they aren’t allowed to say no to physical contact from adults.

 

[ConstantLearner]

There’s also the issue that one doesn’t want kids to lose any natural reserve and get too used to being handled by relative strangers, or to develop the idea that they aren’t allowed to say no to physical contact from adults.

I think that’s for their parents to teach them, but I still agree with the previous comment about not initiating physical contact. Men should be especially careful! (I know you’re a woman, I’m not calling you a man.) Then again, some parents don’t teach. Teachers are role models as well as teaching subjects in books.

 

[Xantippe]

Then again, some parents don’t teach. Teachers are role models as well as teaching subjects in books.

I think this is an area where it’s helpful if all of the safe adults in a child’s life are on the same page.

That way, anybody who isn’t a safe adult is going to stick out like a sore thumb.

Unfortunately, there are still aunties and grandmas out there who haven’t got the memo and are still insisting on getting to hug kids who don’t want to be hugged.

 

[Joe_5859]

Men should be especially careful!

Indeed. I am a touchy person by nature (if anyone has read the “5 Love Languages” book, touch is definitely mine). But I’m very conscientious about it. I’ll hug my guy friends, but in workplace settings, I won’t initiate any sort of contact, especially with women or children. Maybe a handshake in certain situations, but that would be about it.