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

[TheAmazingGrace]

We were discussing the impracticality of “affirmative consent”. A feminist rewriting history is hardly surprising though.

Why are you so keen on potentially assaulting someone?

 

[starshiptrooper]

Why are you so keen on asking loaded questions?

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

Why are you so keen on asking loaded questions?

I want you to examine your motives.

 

[starshiptrooper]

I will give you some advice. The Socratic Method usually works better than assuming the worst in your initial inquiry.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

I will give you some advice. The Socratic Method usually works better than assuming the worst in your initial inquiry.

Like how you assume the worst of feminists and people who say they’ve been raped?

 

[starshiptrooper]

The difference is that I am not trying to get you to examine your motives.

 

[TheAmazingGrace]

The difference is that I am not trying to get you to examine your motives.

What are your motives, SST?

 

[starshiptrooper]

Implementing my worldview.

 

[Xantippe]

So you can take everything you just said and when the right demographic does it, you’ll silence yourselves and start the excuse-making process.

DarkLight was saying that Muslim men in her old area seemed more respectful to women than many non-Muslims. She wasn’t making excuses for bad behavior–quite the reverse.

BTW, being a victim of sexual violence, harassment or rape does NOT give you extra moral authority.

It does give experience and may give insight into why victims do certain things, though.

So who’s the racist?

Hint: Start with anybody who talks about white civilization rather than Western Civilization or America.

That is matter of someone not doing what s/he was hired to do. That certainly doesn’t exemplify the type of “infraction” we were discussing, does it? We weren’t speaking either of incompetence or negligence, were we?

Sexual harassment is incompetence and negligence.

You even admitted the case of a “hotel concierge” who has a habit of using racial slurs to guests. You asked, “Would he keep his job?” And answered, “Probably not.”

I think that using racial slurs to customers in a customer service position is a sign of incompetence and not being well-suited to the job.

Should he be blackballed and never work again? Or should the employer or fellow workers seriously attempt to convince him of the problem with the way he treats others? Subsidiarity.

Fired from one job is not the same as “never work again,” especially given that the unemployment rate is currently 4.1%.

 

[Xantippe]

There is a difference between being a “good man” as defined by an inherently misandrist ideology and being good at being a man. I will always opt for the latter.

Do you prefer good women or women who are good at being women?

I have to say that the second version (good at being a man/good at being a woman) emphasizes the sexual role rather than the goodness. This may be a bit of a stretch, but I think the phrasing suggests that the ideal is a sort of play-acting at gender–wearing drag for one’s own gender, as it were, being a man pretending to be a man, or a woman pretending to be a woman. It doesn’t sound very genuine to me, and it ignores the fact that there are a lot of commonalities in virtue between the sexes. Catholics, after all, do not publish pink catechisms for girls and women and blue catechisms for boys and men.

We were discussing the impracticality of “affirmative consent”. A feminist rewriting history is hardly surprising though.

And I’m saying it’s practical and it’s weird that you don’t think it is. And if I’m remembering that thread, a couple of married people agreed with me.

I want you to examine your motives.

Yes–how close to sexual assault do we want to get?

Like how you assume the worst of feminists and people who say they’ve been raped?

Right. In this thread we’ve gotten a lot of theories why people might be lying…but not so much interest in dealing with the possibility that they are telling the truth–unless the accused rapists were Muslim, of course.

This is called “begging the question”–when you start with the assumption that you wish to prove, namely that they’re lying. It’s the opposite of weighing evidence.

I’m still befuddled by the sort of person who sees a dozen women accuse a prominent man of harassment and/or sexual assault, and their first thought is–they’re doing this to help their careers. There’s a much simpler explanation of why a dozen women might make the same accusation of a single person.

 

[Rozellelily]

just think there is strong evidence that a growing number of women in modern western, secular, societies have become frail, entitled, narcissistic, and preoccupied by frivolities

What frivolities are you referring to?
Regarding non western societies-Middle Eastern women wear makeup (some really love to pile it on) ,African women wear makeup etc…

If you mean excessive preoccupation as the issue then that is more understandable but in reality isn’t that to be expected because it isn’t a Christian society but a “mixed” society?

Maybe your focusing too much on what you see as negative in society but there are many positive examples of “western society women” too.
For example this 26 year old young woman who has been fostering troubled children since she was 23 years old.

Parenting - Latest news headlines in Australia and around the world, tips and advice for parents | 9Honey Parenting - 9Honey

 

[DarkLight]

Let’s clear up a few things:

(1) No one’s saying Muslims can’t be horrible people. Just that we can’t go from “so-and-so is a Muslim” to “so-and-so is probably a horrible person.” Give them the same grace we want to be given after the pedophile priest scandal.

(2) Yes, we’re going to wonder on people who push back on affirmative consent. There’s an awful lot of men out there who think any manipulation they can do to get a woman to not say no, or not say no enough, or not say no early enough, or whatever, means that it’s ok to have sex. Too much protesting on how awful consent is makes us suspicious that our consent is mostly an annoyance that society dictates men have to overcome.

(3) I daresay someone who was good at being a man in Catholic terms would be acceptable to all the ladies here. It’s an error of modern society that tells men that hypersexualization is manly. Our priests are celibate - would any of us question their masculinity? Do you see it being acceptable for any of them to act in the ways described here - or any Catholic community leader?

 

[Theo520]

“Since 1953, 100,000–300,000 North Koreans have defected, most of whom have fled to Russia or China.[9] 1,418 were registered as arriving in South Korea in 2016. In 2017, there were 31,093 defectors registered with the Unification Ministry in South Korea, 71% of whom were women.”

That’s not a fair interpretation of a very complex situation. Fewer men defect from North Korea because they have less opportunity. The men are mostly stuck in the Army where there is little opportunity to sneak over the border. I think the last defector was shot several times. The women work in service jobs in foreign countries, where they have a better chance at defecting without getting a bullet in the back.

 

[HarryStotle]

Sexual harassment is incompetence and negligence.

Yeah, no. Harassment, assault or rape are not aspects of “incompetence and negligence.” They are sins of commission, not omission nor lack of competence.

You might want to stop before you begin losing credibility.

I think that using racial slurs to customers in a customer service position is a sign of incompetence and not being well-suited to the job.

Again, you are in jeopardy of losing your credibility. Someone could be very competent and very well-suited, ability-wise, for a job, but may have some unjustifiable though psychologically understandable prejudice against another race. That does not entail they are not “well-suited.” Suppose the person grew up in a locality where their only exposure to members of another race was where those few individuals uniformly shared a serious vice? The prejudiced individual may, simply speaking, just not know better. Their behaviour and attitude may indeed be prejudiced but still be understandable given their limited life experience.

Not everyone is as cosmopolitan or well-read/informed as you. We can’t just assume the worst about people, even the ones we desperately want to slur and call “racist,” “bigot,” some flavour of phobe, or worse. That proclivity on our part, i.e., to call others such names, might also be an instance of prejudice precisely because we would have judged them before we fully understood why they are the way they are or whether their intentions are, in fact, malevolent or just ignorant/misinformed.

Fired from one job is not the same as “never work again,” especially given that the unemployment rate is currently 4.1%.

Seems odd that you would refer to using racial slurs as “incompetence” or being “ill-suited” for a job, then suggest someone else should hire them to do the same job they are so incompetent or ill-suited to do. Or are you suggesting that using racial slurs should actually be part of the job description for some jobs, but not others? Those who use them just got into the wrong employment track, then?

 

[DarkLight]

Yeah, no. Harassment, assault or rape are not aspects of “incompetence and negligence.” They are sins of commission, not omission nor lack of competence.

I think the point is that, while they are also much worse thing, they at the very least meet the criteria of someone being a problem at their job. If you can’t (or won’t) do your job without harassing women, or insulting people of other races, you’re not doing your job appropriately.

What I said was – to reiterate – if the matter is serious enough that someone should be fired or lose their livelihood, perhaps it should be dealt with by the law. If not it should be dealt with at a local level by those in position to do so.

That’s what it was responding to - that there are plenty of things one can and even ought to be fired for that aren’t legal matters. It’s perfectly legal for me to use all the racial slurs I want, but most likely I’d be fired for doing so at work. So we can’t just turn around and say, well, if it’s bad enough to get fired then obviously it should have been taken to the police, when it comes to harassing women.

Someone who doesn’t know that they shouldn’t use racial slurs in the workplace is also someone who’s not suitably trained in how to do a job in the modern world.

 

[HarryStotle]

Let’s clear up a few things:

(1) No one’s saying Muslims can’t be horrible people. Just that we can’t go from “so-and-so is a Muslim” to “so-and-so is probably a horrible person.” Give them the same grace we want to be given after the pedophile priest scandal.

(2) Yes, we’re going to wonder on people who push back on affirmative consent. There’s an awful lot of men out there who think any manipulation they can do to get a woman to not say no, or not say no enough, or not say no early enough, or whatever, means that it’s ok to have sex. Too much protesting on how awful consent is makes us suspicious that our consent is mostly an annoyance that society dictates men have to overcome.

(3) I daresay someone who was good at being a man in Catholic terms would be acceptable to all the ladies here. It’s an error of modern society that tells men that hypersexualization is manly. Our priests are celibate - would any of us question their masculinity? Do you see it being acceptable for any of them to act in the ways described here - or any Catholic community leader?

So the take-away here is that…

1. … there is a vanishingly small chance that a few Muslims might be horrible people…
2. … there are “an awful lot of men” who ARE horrible people, and
3. … none of us would question the masculinity of any Catholic priests even though some of them have been accused of pedophilia or pederasty.

How are these points NOT all textbook examples of some faulty generalization or composition fallacy?

 

[DarkLight]

How are these points NOT all textbook examples of some faulty generalization or composition fallacy?

Probably because your take-away isn’t actually what I said.

(1) I didn’t say that. I said that we can’t assume an individual Muslim is significantly more likely to be a horrible person, more than another person who isn’t Muslim.
(2) “An awful lot” means enough that it’s something women think about when they meet a guy who questions ideas of consent - because there are bad men out there and many of them think they’re perfectly ok guys who are just acting how they have to act to manage the irrational behavior of women.
(3) “Any of us” means those of us here. On a Catholic forum. And it’s saying we wouldn’t question their masculinity for them being celibate. I said in the next sentence that there’s ways it wouldn’t be acceptable for them to act!

It kind of seems like you’re trying to make my words mean the most horrible awful thing you could possibly make them mean, rather than what I actually said under a standard interpretation of the english language.

 

[Rozellelily]

1.Links are requested with an open mind to support claims,not because of any comfort or discomfort.
It’s a big world so links provide stories of situations that people may not be aware of happening in other countries.

2.The cause of Rape or sexual assault is not because America (or similar) is not based on catholic values/catholic society.
A person doesn’t have to be Catholic to understand the law of “decency”.
Any man who has decency and good will towards others,does not accept hurting another for a short term “sexual gain”.

3.Exactly which one/s of the Metoo accused do you refer to as being a good man?

4.Hollywood doesn’t not mention about sexual assaults/rapes in Sweden or Congo etc not because they don’t care about them happening but rather because “Hollywood” is self absorbed.At least that’s my opinion of Hollywood.

5.Metoo supporters can be a wide variety of types of people-Christians,feminists,agnostics,men etc…
The common ground is that they all support women feeling comfortable to state they’ve been sexually assaulted,that it’s not ok and they shouldn’t be blamed,and that it should be addressed instead of covered up (eg:like Harvey Weinsteins friends).
It’s irrational and a big jump to think that Christian supporters (and many agnostics too) of Metoo will next agree with polygamy or especially of course not child marriage as Metoo is all about consent & no child can consent.

6.The issue is not with you pointing out that there are sexual crimes relating to Muslim refugee perpetrators in some parts of Europe.That is worthwhile sharing if it is presented in a balanced way & with concern instead of simply as anti Islam sentiment.
The issue is with your black and while thinking,generalisations, and lack of open mindedness.
A person supporting Metoo does not mean that that same person cannot have concerns about any potential injustices occurred due to the traction of the movement.
Eg:If a man is accused & denied due process-that’s a concern for me.
Or if someone is fired from a job due to innocent comments that were misperceived & management overreacts due to the “current climate” than that’s very concerning too.

 

[HarryStotle]

Maybe your focusing too much on what you see as negative in society but there are many positive examples of “western society women” too.
For example this 26 year old young woman who has been fostering troubled children since she was 23 years old.

Ah, yes. I agree with you fully.

Now you can move to addressing the problem @DarkLight has with “focusing too much on what…[she sees]… as negative” regarding men.

Can you get her to agree?

There’s an awful lot of men out there who think any manipulation they can do to get a woman to not say no, or not say no enough, or not say no early enough, or whatever, means that it’s ok to have sex. Too much protesting on how awful consent is makes us suspicious that our consent is mostly an annoyance that society dictates men have to overcome.

 

[DarkLight]

Context is important here, and the ability to use judgment.

A woman wearing makeup is not harming you. A man who doesn’t think consent is important, or who believes it’s ok to use tricks or manipulation to get “consent”, is an actual danger to me.

And I’m guessing if I decided to not “focus on the negative” and something bad happened, it would be my fault for not being conscious and responsible enough.