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

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn’t think that you would pick an example where the victim didn’t give consent.

I was thinking along the lines of a drunk going home with someone, groggily consenting to sex, and then waking with no recollection of the night before.

Or going out with someone who’s promised you a good duck egg souffle only to find that the souffle is only adequate and they serve you white wine when you really prefer red. But then you go home with them anyway for 15 min of lousy pity sex because the odds that you’ll find anyone else to hang out with on the weekend are now shot and you’ve got nothing better to do.

In both cases the consent is more “meh” than “enthusiastic” but still freely given. Adding a requirement that consent should be enthusiastic just adds confusion.
 
TheAmazingGrace said:
No, not really. I recently watched a movie called “Compliance,” which was based on a true story about a sicko who prank-called a McDonald’s posing as a police officer, and used this ruse to manipulate a gullible manager into doing terrible things to a young female employee
Click to expand...
Don’t see this as a valid comparison since the guy was guilt of serious crimes irregardless of the perv factor.
 
Werbenjagermanjensen said:
I didn’t think that you would pick an example where the victim didn’t give consent.

I was thinking along the lines of a drunk going home with someone, groggily consenting to sex, and then waking with no recollection of the night before.
Click to expand...
She did give consent, if we follow your line of thinking. She could have left (albeit without her clothes or the approval of her manager), just as your intoxicated example could have said no (even though she was so drunk her memory was impaired).

I haven’t heard any accusations of rape based on mediocre experience come out of the #MeToo movement, so I really don’t know what you’re basing this off of.
 
Last edited:
Theo520 said:
Don’t see this as a valid comparison since the guy was guilt of serious crimes irregardless of the perv factor.
Click to expand...
The girl could have said no, and she wasn’t physically forced to blow the guy, but her ability to give consent was still impaired. That’s the parallel.
 
Last edited:
TheAmazingGrace said:
She did give consent, if we follow your line of thinking. She could have left (albeit without her clothes or the approval of her manager), just as your intoxicated example could have said no (even though she was so drunk her memory was impaired).

I haven’t heard any accusations of rape based on mediocre experience come out of the #MeToo movement, so I really don’t know what you’re basing this off of.
Click to expand...
I think there are many many cases where consent was given but one party was in a power position over the other. These are valid #MeToo stories I think.

The title IX discussions about college campuses provide many examples of morning regret that was later called assault. I don’t think some of these are valid #MeToo stories I think.
 
Last edited:
That would be under duress.

There was a case in New York almost 40 years ago, where armed gunmrn held a diner hostage and forced people to undress, and forced some customers into performing sex acts on each other.

It was a horrific crime.
 
The drinking example could have said no but said yes with no coercion, albeit with no memory of having done so the next morning. You are responsible for the dumb choices you make when you drink after all. Actually happened to a male friend of mine. Would that mean that he is a rape victim and needs his own #metoo moment? If two drunks go home with one another how would you determine who is sexually assaulting whom?

There are a couple of metoo stories of sexual assault that are nothing more than bad dates. With the lumping together of all different cases of sexual misconduct from something heinous like Weinstein to something innocuous like Al Frankin it’s difficult to tell sometimes if we’re talking about rape or simply being too grabby.
 
Werbenjagermanjensen said:
With the lumping together of all different cases of sexual misconduct from something heinous like Weinstein to something innocuous like Al Frankin it’s difficult to tell sometimes if we’re talking about rape or simply being too grabby.
Click to expand...
Grabby is bad, too.
 
nearlycatholic said:
You can wait your turn in line, manage the flat tire yourself, wish someone would tell you your haircut is cute, wait for the next elevator and open your own door.
Click to expand...
Women can do these things by themselves and always have. It’s not your job.
 
nearlycatholic said:
You can wait your turn in line, manage the flat tire yourself, wish someone would tell you your haircut is cute, wait for the next elevator and open your own door.
Click to expand...
Believe it or not, we can get through the day without you.

I can wait my turn in line, call AAA or my Geico, get through the day without haircut compliments, wait my turn for the elevator, and open doors (when not encumbered with crutches, small children, stroller, or packages).

The lack of these things does not make me fall apart.

However, I do want men to keep their hands to themselves unless certain that they are welcome. (And women need to do the same thing.)
 
But you do need one. Even the most rabid feminist can’t have a family without one.

You make the world sound awfully cold, with no friendly hugs or kisses on the cheek, or even a pat on the back. I would not want to live in your world.
 
Meglio sola che mal accompagnata.

Better to be alone than in bad company.
 
Lea101 said:
Oh gosh. Stop overreacting and read what they actually want.
Click to expand...
LOL I’m not the one overreacting. I actually enjoy human contact, compliments, and the love of my friends.

Just because a man compliments you or touches you in a friendly way doesn’t mean he wants anything more than that. All you feminists are the ones overreacting.
 
Last edited:
Except that’s not what we’re saying. We’re saying make sure the other person is on board.

I’m perfectly fine with not having friendly hugs or pats on the back from my coworkers. I’m definitely fine with not having random men trying to grab my behind or whatever.

When it comes to actual friends or romantic partners, we’re perfectly capable of working out who wants what on our own. We’re not saying never touch anyone ever - we’re saying don’t push physical contact on people who you don’t know are ok with it.
ConstantLearner said:
Just because a man compliments you or touches you in a friendly way doesn’t mean he wants anything more than that. All you feminists are the ones overreacting.
Click to expand...
Or we’ve been repeatedly cussed out by the same men because we “should have known” and were “leading him on.” Can’t win either way.
 
ConstantLearner said:
You make the world sound awfully cold, with no friendly hugs or kisses on the cheek, or even a pat on the back. I would not want to live in your world.
Click to expand...
It is more of heartwrenching…

But it has to do with how we grow up and culture. And it makes a lot of a difference when hugs or little demostrations of affection are there and they are part of our daily life.

But it is OK. Some people prefer it differently. And it is fine.
 
Last edited:
DarkLight said:
Or we’ve been repeatedly cussed out by the same men because we “should have known” and were “leading him on.” Can’t win either way.
Click to expand...
Just a cursory reading gives one the idea that you’re all supermodels or former Miss Universes.

Men despise rejection. Unless they are hardcore serial rapists, they usually choose a woman who appears to be open to their advances. (Not singling anyone out, just saying “in general.”)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top