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

[Theo520]

I took it as the guy was her boyfriend and the outing was planned. A year plus later, she decided what they did was rape.

I suspect that either she felt pressured or just had morning regret, a year afterwards. Since he was her boyfriend and probably another student at the college, I suspect the boy simply wanted to have sex with his girlfriend rather than commit a felony. It’s a great example of why we need clear rules for consent. Clear consent won’t eliminate regret, but it will help in assigning responsibility more fairly.

 

[DarkLight]

FYI: I think you’ll find a lot of us held to traditional morality without feminism when we were younger, and ended up in various bad situations anyway (for a personal example, alone with a man I thought held to the same values). And then experienced a lot of blame or shame for the situation - yes, mine did even include realizing it was assault later, because I’d been taught if I got a guy turned on, even if it was merely by being present in the room with him, I couldn’t expect him to stop. There were warning signs, but I didn’t see them because I thought the idea that I should be on the looking for things like that was feminist nonsense.

 

[Werbenjagermanjensen]

You can’t be kept perfectly safe and perfectly free at the same time. It’s not reasonable to expect Christendom to take action on a completely unverifiable claim that took place well over a year ago. But, yes, Zippy is wrong to suggest that the student was imprudent to go to Shenandoah national park. The park is absolutely crawling with tourists and a nice hike seems like a perfectly reasonable date.

It’s better to simply assume the risk of the activities you pursue, same as every other adult, and not ask a college admin to keep you safe. If you had to end up listening to the college admin of a conservative college to stay safe you wouldn’t be able to do anything on Friday nights beside crotchet and rewatch “The Song of Bernadette” on VHS.

 

[Theo520]

FYI: I think you’ll find a lot of us held to traditional morality without feminism when we were younger, and ended up in various bad situations anyway (for a personal example, alone with a man I thought held to the same values). And then experienced a lot of blame or shame for the situation - yes, mine did even include realizing it was assault later, because I’d been taught if I got a guy turned on, even if it was merely by being present in the room with him, I couldn’t expect him to stop. There were warning signs, but I didn’t see them because I thought the idea that I should be on the looking for things like that was feminist nonsense.

Yes, we must teach women that their consent is paramount and not an obligation because the reasons you mention, he bought dinner, etc etc.

 

[ChunkMonk]

And I’m pointing out that when the conversation turns to women protecting themselves, suddenly “getting in bed with a random stranger”

You brought up a scenario in which that was the case.

or “getting black-out drunk in a bar” are the only examples that come up.

Actually Xiantipe provided us with another one:

Driving into the isolated wilderness with a stranger.

that any choice at all we make to step outside of our houses can be at fault if we end up getting assaulted.

“Don’t get into bed with strange boys, get wasted with strangers, or drive into isolated wilderness with strangers.”

“So I can’t do anything!?!”

“… Are you serious?”

 

[DarkLight]

In my case, I’d say I should have been more aware that he generally didn’t seem to care when I said no to something. But I really had no teaching about consent at all, other than the typical scenario where a guy sticks a knife in your face, or where you’re drunk. And he was a practicing Catholic, went to Mass every Sunday and involved in the Newman club and whatnot - I had presumed that as such he wouldn’t be a guy who would try to take advantage of a woman. Turned out he was one of the “everything but actual sex” types.

“Don’t get into bed with strange boys, get wasted with strangers, or drive into isolated wilderness with strangers.”

“So I can’t do anything!?!”

“… Are you serious?”

Well, every scenario we’ve brought up that isn’t that has been conveniently ignored or responded to with a vague insistence that women ought to be taking care of themselves and all this “consent” stuff is just a way of trying to dodge our own responsibility. So yeah, it sure sounds like any choice we make that ends with us being assaulted is going to somehow after the fact be turned into some sort of unwise risk.

 

[ChunkMonk]

It’s a great example of why we need clear rules for consent.

The ‘safe’ hookup is a myth, and a heinous one at that.

 

[ChunkMonk]

Well, every scenario we’ve brought up that isn’t that has been conveniently ignored or responded to with a vague insistence that women ought to be taking care of themselves and all this “consent” stuff is just a way of trying to dodge our own responsibility.

Class, I’d like to point out the continued use of Strawmen fallacies. You’ll note the multiple times I made the point that people can be victimized by circumstance and differentiated between someone who is made a victim and someone who makes themselves a victim. You’ll also note how the frame of the argument is always bouncing back and forth, one minute it is about a (hypothetical) girl who was doing every thing she could, then it seamlessly slides into girls who are laying down with strange men in isolated forests, then seamlessly slides back to the first scenario whenever a bit of prudence is suggested.

The feminist in the wild is a mystifying creature when first encountered, but ultimately predictable if you have experience dealing with them.

 

[DarkLight]

You really haven’t. You’ve pointed out that people can be victimized by circumstances, but then dismissed every single discussion of consent and multiple women saying they get blamed for anything short of staying locked up in their houses. You’re laying every single thing at the feet of hook-up culture even when women provide multiple examples where they’re trying to go about their lives or have chaste relationships and are still assaulted. You’ve also decried the idea that the modern woman should expect men, or society at large, to provide any sort of protection. You’ve said we can’t expect to work with men men (the lions comment) and then expect to not be assaulted. You’ve repeatedly dodged any question of what a woman who wants to live a chaste life is to do to protect herself, if she doesn’t have a man to protect her, while insisting the primary responsibility lies on women and it’s unfair of her to expect anyone else to help protect her. You’ve also repeatedly referred to men in terms of predators that would suggest a responsible woman ought to consider any man she’s alone with as a threat and it’s irresponsible to be alone, despite us mentioning multiple scenarios where that’s simply not practical to do unless she can have her family on hand at all times.

I don’t think this one’s a straw man so much as selectively forgetting about your own words.

 

[Theo520]

The ‘safe’ hookup is a myth, and a heinous one at that.

No, I’m not condoning “hookup”, just being accountable for your role if that’s were a date goes.

 

[Xantippe]

And then experienced a lot of blame or shame for the situation - yes, mine did even include realizing it was assault later, because I’d been taught if I got a guy turned on, even if it was merely by being present in the room with him, I couldn’t expect him to stop. There were warning signs, but I didn’t see them because I thought the idea that I should be on the looking for things like that was feminist nonsense.

And what warning signs would you be looking for, if All Men Are Like That?

It takes believing that Not All Men Are Like That before it’s worth paying attention to particular red flags.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Conceal carry.

 

[SuperLuigi]

You’ll note the multiple times I made the point that people can be victimized by circumstance and differentiated between someone who is made a victim and someone who makes themselves a victim.

This should be framed.

 

[Xantippe]

I suppose this means you can’t even admit the basic principle because to do so would imply that a woman has even the slightest responsibility and we could never do that. That’s what I was expecting.

‘Chastely’ fondling each other. That’s wonderful.

If you can’t give a detailed list of “don’ts” and if you yourself say that the safety level varies immensely from situation to situation–how exactly are women expected to infallibly know how to keep themselves safe? That’s just not reasonable.

I didn’t use the word fondle, and definitely not “chastely fondling”. I said “smooch.”

When I was writing, I believed that smooch just meant kiss, but I see from the online dictionary that it is somewhat broader than I thought: “kiss and cuddle amorously.” I’ll revise my description to “lots of kissing.”

 

[Werbenjagermanjensen]

If you can’t give a detailed list of “don’ts” and if you yourself say that the safety level varies immensely from situation to situation–how exactly are women expected to infallibly know how to keep themselves safe? That’s just not reasonable.

At least you’ll always have Captain Hindsight around to let you know you wouldn’t have been raped if you had just avoided situations where you could have been raped. That’s always super helpful.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

You’ve got a real nasty attitude hiding under that thin veneer of ‘compassion’.

I’m not the one who wants to take away the rights of the opposite gender.

 

[Xantippe]

But I thought all these women in abusive marriages and relationships had NO WAY OF KNOWING the guy would be abusive???

There are some examples of abuse coming out of the blue (like how was my relative’s wife supposed to realize he was a pedophile before they got married?), but I don’t think anybody in this thread has said that there are never any warning signs of a potential abuser (hence “red flags”).

I suggest you read the article again. He defended the college by reminding people that the girl made the decision to drive off into the mountains with her boyfriend. It was imprudent on her part given that over a year later, she decided she was raped.

So, we’re doing the thing where if something bad happens, she was imprudent? What if nothing bad had happened, they had a chaste courtship, got married and had six kids together? Would it still have been imprudent? Again, it would have been perfectly safe for me to do the same thing with my future husband.

Zippy really did write, “The most proximate person responsible for the impossibility of determining the truth in an objective, public way is the person in the literal driver seat who chose to drive the two of them, alone, deep into the Virginia wilderness. And in close proximity to that person – perhaps carrying the greater responsibility, because responsibility comes along with age, wisdom, and authority – are parents who give driver’s licenses to young women and send them off to college hundreds of miles distant without any inkling that a seventeen year old driving deep into the wilderness with a random boyfriend is every bit as imprudent as a ten year old getting into a car with a stranger offering candy.”

This is an interesting addition to our list of analogies for what being with a man is like.

college sophomore taking drive with college boyfriend = 10-year-old getting into car with stranger offering candy

So, one is supposed to assume that one’s boyfriend is a predator. Again, why are women expected to marry these dangerous beasts, if it’s not even safe to get into a car with one as a 19-year-old (he got her age wrong) college sophomore?

In fact not driving into the deep wilderness alone with a stranger is actually very unwise because if you don’t go into an isolated wilderness with a stranger then you’ll never get married.

I would actually say she’s lucky. If things had gone differently, she might have married the guy (a lot of Christendom couples get married).

But we also need to remember that the boy is only a stranger who showed no warning signs of any kind when we’re asking her to protect herself by not getting involved with bad guys. When we ask her to protect herself by not taking risks with any guys, then he becomes a trustworthy boyfriend who she knows will never hurt her.

This was a fellow student from a tiny, uber-Catholic 500 student college. What was supposed to be the red flag here?

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

If catcalling bothers you, you should seek help to deal with it. It’s pointless trying to change anyone much less macho strangers the world over. The best thing is to toughen up and just let people be who they’re going to be. If it causes you to stress or alter plans you’re letting it get to you too much.

Have you ever been catcalled?

 

[Theo520]

So, we’re doing the thing where if something bad happens, she was imprudent?

Yes, it is a learning opportunity if you do something with one expectation and get an undesirable outcome.
Smart people learn from their mistakes, even if the other party broke the law.

I remember to lock my car after it was robbed, it was imprudent of me to leave it unlocked one evening.

 

[Lea101]

Yes, we must teach women that their consent is paramount and not an obligation because the reasons you mention, he bought dinner, etc etc

Definitely. I think it was Emily Wilson, a youth minister for girls, who kept saying how many girls have came up to her and told her they’re always scared to say ‘no’ because they don’t want to seem rude. It’s ridiculous. A little selfishness could do them good, lol.