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 might ‘criticize’ her for feeling the need to regale us with the harrowing tale of getting a tasteless email,
She was posting in a comment thread on Dr. Nerdlove, which is a secular site devoted to helping the geeky get less socially awkward and get better at dating.

So, it’s not “whining” in that environment, but extremely helpful data.
 
So, if anything, we should be high-fiving today’s young adults for being less promiscuous, less likely to have abortions, and less likely to divorce.
There shouldn’t be any high-fiving because they aren’t consciously choosing to behave better. Divorce is only falling because marriage rates are falling.
Young adults are less promiscuous compared to older generations at the same time of their lives and that’s good but the underlying reasons for why aren’t sustainable.
But we also have to consider cohort effects because if marriage is plummeting but cohabitation is rising, then lifetime promiscuity may end up the same as the older generations or possibly even higher. Marriage is a deterrent for promiscuity for most people. Cohabitation is not and not only that cohabitation is also acts as an obstacle for marriage.
two years ago Conservatives in Canada lost the election partly because they had initiated a law that endorsed reporting spousal abuse. It was seen by liberal types as potentially targeting some ethnic or religious groups, and as such was characterized as xenophobic.
That barely registered. They lost because of expense scandals that involved 3 Tories in the Senate plus the media were drooling over a second Trudeau being PM.
 
Last edited:
There shouldn’t be any high-fiving because they aren’t consciously choosing to behave better. Divorce is only falling because marriage rates are falling.
People are choosing not to marry and then divorce, which was very much a thing in the 1970s and 1980s.

I think it’s an improvement that people are entering into marriage more seriously and with a higher level of commitment.
But we also have to consider cohort effects because if marriage is plummeting but cohabitation is rising, then lifetime promiscuity may end up the same as the older generations or possibly even higher.
I don’t think cohabitation is rising. You may not have seen the links I’ve posted about how an unprecedented number of young people are living at home with family.


Edited to add: Sorry, I shouldn’t have said unprecedented. A huge number of young people are living at home compared to the last two generations.
 
Last edited:
I think it’s an improvement that people are entering into marriage more seriously and with a higher level of commitment.
I agree with that. Many who married were simply not mature enough and didn’t understand the self-sacrificial nature of it.
I don’t think cohabitation is rising. You may not have seen the links I’ve posted about how an unprecedented number of young people are living at home with family.
I meant cohabitation as a replacement for marriage not so much as a living arrangement. And also when all millennials move out and could marry, most likely won’t but instead cohabitate. Right now, those who have moved out, many are cohabitating and forgoing marriage. No real commitment means no solid boundaries.
 
Last edited:
I think this is relevant to the thread:
The #MeToo conversation “has held up one segment of society as the blanket boogeyman in this,” specifically, “baby boomer males,” said Shachi Kurl, executive director of Angus Reid Institute.

“I think our data in terms of what people are thinking and what their own mindsets are does run counter to that.”
But even as workplace norms are changing, younger men, though certainly not the majority of them, were more likely than their much older peers to support boorish behaviour. They were also more likely than men of older generations, and women of their own generation, to agree that, “some people have definitely behaved like jerks but they shouldn’t lose their jobs or reputations for it.”

Taylor, of the University of Toronto, finds parallels in “not too distant” incidents involving young men at sporting events approaching female reporters and shouting “F – her right in the p –“ into the camera during live news clips. “You didn’t see older men do that,” she said.

“That’s a new social iteration, a behaviour that we hadn’t really seen in public before — picking out women journalists in a very public forum and saying something, on camera, very confrontational, violent and pornographic.”

Generational shift or simply older men matured?
 
Generational shift or simply older men matured?
Both?

The chart is very interesting.

I was looking it up, and cohabitation is higher.


This was interesting:

“About 70 percent of women with less than a high-school education moved in with a man as a first union in 2006 to 2010, up from 46 percent in 1995. For women with a bachelor’s degree or higher, 47 percent now live together first, up from about 34 percent in 1995, the study shows.”

So there’s a big socioeconomic component to cohabitation.

My suspicion is that there may be economic pressures encouraging cohabitation among poorer/less educated women, whereas better off/more educated women are under less economic pressure.
 
Last edited:
More likely an S&M joke than anything.
Um, no it wasn’t.

Also, our differing definitions of “light-hearted jokes” brought this to mind. You and ropes n’ chains guy remind me so much of Stewie in this clip.

 
Last edited:
Yes, when our toilets back up, we should blame the progressives. They are behind every single thing that is wrong with this world.
Strawman.
Yes, the light-hearted joke she recieved in response must have been traumatizing…
🤣

I think this thread has pretty much run its course. The metoo supporters are going to cave to Islam and probably transgender ideas as well. I should have known that once Alyssa Milano got her hands on this, it was going to be a bandwagon issue and a tool. So the movement isn’t going to “put the rich and powerful on notice” especially since lots of men and women will still take it on the chin in order to advance his or her career.

Like any other flavour of the month issue, there’s always going to be people who are gluttons for pushiment or would just do empty virtue-signaling for themselves or their “friends” than actually accomplish something. People are going to deny this and get upset that I even mentioned the word, but it will continue to happen nonetheless.

In the end, metoo doesn’t have what it takes to compete in a culture war, and I do not trust them to help sexual assault victims.
 
Last edited:
Point is, every ill of modern culture gets blamed on the progressive movement, as if somehow the world was perfect and none of these ills existed until progressives got their evil hands on it and ruined everything.
The metoo supporters are going to cave to Islam and probably transgender ideas as well.
Now this is a good example of a straw man, with a bit of non sequitur thrown in for good measure. It seems islam has become the boogeyman - if you don’t agree with what the rightwing folk think you should, you must be supporting the takeover of society by fundamentalist islam! Those things aren’t even related.

Also, @Xantippe’s ex-boyfriend joking about how he should rape her to open the relationship up is a significant red flag, but a man making a rape joke in response to a woman turning him down is a light-hearted joke that women just need to get over…you can’t have it both ways here. It rather seems like we as women need to “get over ourselves” right up until something bad happens, at which point we should have known and taken more responsibility for our own safety.

The fact that as many women on this thread have had major issues with how men behave should probably be a red flag that it’s not just something that’s being invented out of thin air. And plenty of us got the same sort of responses - we were probably just attention seeking, we shouldn’t mess with men’s lives like that, we should have been more careful because what did we expect to happen?
 
So the movement isn’t going to “put the rich and powerful on notice” especially since lots of men and women will still take it on the chin in order to advance his or her career.
Yes, but some won’t, they’ll have a ready-made venue, and they’ll get a fairer hearing than ever before.
Like any other flavour of the month issue, there’s always going to be people who are gluttons for pushiment or would just do empty virtue-signaling for themselves or their “friends” than actually accomplish something.
You think having a history of molestation or sexual assault is a “flavor of the month” type issue for victims?

No doubt there are bandwagon jumpers, but anybody who has a personal history with molestation or sexual assault is not going to move on readily from MeToo to saving the whales or whatever.

To recap, the following happened in my personal real life circle:

–At least 5 girls from my extended family were molested by our older relative, who lived out his sunset years in an expensive nursing home and got no punishment short of judgment day.
–I was sexually assaulted by my college boyfriend
–A good friend was sexually assaulted by a boyfriend in her 20s.
–A young relative was battered by her boyfriend/fiance who eventually turned out to be wanted for murder. (I include this in the MeToo list because while I haven’t asked, the odds are very high that the boyfriend/fiance was sexually abusive, given everything else he did.)

To my knowledge, the last one is the only one where the legal system was involved, but just for the unrelated murder.

That’s a huge number of incidents.
In the end, metoo doesn’t have what it takes to compete in a culture war, and I do not trust them to help sexual assault victims.
It’s helping already.

For one thing, we’re having this huge conversation that we wouldn’t have had otherwise.
 
I think this thread has pretty much run its course.
Be prepared to see the subject pop again the next time some CAFer does the “I want a virgin bride!” routine.
Also, @Xantippe’s ex-boyfriend joking about how he should rape her to open the relationship up is a significant red flag, but a man making a rape joke in response to a woman turning him down is a light-hearted joke that women just need to get over…you can’t have it both ways here.
Right. And I should add that the remark from the ex-boyfriend was presented as, here’s this crazy thing my friend said! So it was definitely at least as light-hearted as the “ropes and chains” remark I quoted, particularly since the “ropes and chains” comment suggests murder, too.

Now that I’m a middle aged lady, I agree with Kathy Shaidle that nobody is ever just kidding.
It rather seems like we as women need to “get over ourselves” right up until something bad happens, at which point we should have known and taken more responsibility for our own safety.
Right. See also Schroedinger’s rapist, which I think the “ropes and chains” guy is a good example of.
The fact that as many women on this thread have had major issues with how men behave should probably be a red flag that it’s not just something that’s being invented out of thin air.
Yes. And it’s no good people warning us how bad things are going to be under our future Islamic overlords if those people clearly have no interest in doing things to protect women now and/or are clearly yearning to create a Christianized version of the Islamic fundamentalist society, with women stripped of their current legal rights and totally dependent on the good will of men from their families to protect them.
And plenty of us got the same sort of responses - we were probably just attention seeking, we shouldn’t mess with men’s lives like that, we should have been more careful because what did we expect to happen?
Right. Some posters on this thread clearly start from the assumption that a woman is lying, and then create a huge theory as to why she might be lying, rather than doing a fair weighing of the evidence on either side.

And if they don’t do that, they devote themselves to the question of what she did wrong.

Zippy Catholic’s treatment of Adele Smith’s Christendom story is paradigmatic–his rock bottom assumption was that she was either lying or at fault.

(Now, people may wonder, how do I evaluate the truthfulness of somebody online when I don’t have access to the full story? I would suggest treating it as any other statement from the same person. Do they seem generally truthful in other areas? If so, it does absolutely no harm to anybody to take it at face value.)
 
Here’s the classic “Schroedinger’s Rapist” piece (WARNING: CONTAINS FEMINISM), which is a guide to how not to act like a rapist:

https://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/guest-blogger-starling-schrodinger’s-rapist-or-a-guy’s-guide-to-approaching-strange-women-without-being-maced/

“Now, you want to become acquainted with a woman you see in public. The first thing you need to understand is that women are dealing with a set of challenges and concerns that are strange to you, a man. To begin with, we would rather not be killed or otherwise violently assaulted.”

“While you may assume that none of the men you know are rapists, I can assure you that at least one is.”

“When you approach me in public, you are Schrödinger’s Rapist. You may or may not be a man who would commit rape. I won’t know for sure unless you start sexually assaulting me. I can’t see inside your head, and I don’t know your intentions. If you expect me to trust you—to accept you at face value as a nice sort of guy—you are not only failing to respect my reasonable caution, you are being cavalier about my personal safety.”

“To begin with, you must accept that I set my own risk tolerance. When you approach me, I will begin to evaluate the possibility you will do me harm. That possibility is never 0%. For some women, particularly women who have been victims of violent assaults, any level of risk is unacceptable.”

“Fortunately, I can tell you with some certainty, because she’s already sending messages to you. Looking out the window, reading a book, working on a computer, arms folded across chest, body away from you = do not disturb. So, y’know, don’t disturb her.”

“On the other hand, if she is turned towards you, making eye contact, and she responds in a friendly and talkative manner when you speak to her, you are getting a green light. You can continue the conversation until you start getting signals to back off.”

“If you fail to respect what women say, you label yourself a problem.”

“There’s a man with whom I went out on a single date—afternoon coffee, for one hour by the clock—on July 25th. In the two days after the date, he sent me about fifteen e-mails, scolding me for non-responsiveness. I e-mailed him back, saying, “Look, this is a disproportionate response to a single date. You are making me uncomfortable. Do not contact me again.” It is now October 7th. Does he still e-mail? Yeah. He does. About every two weeks.”

“Because a man who ignores a woman’s NO in a non-sexual setting is more likely to ignore NO in a sexual setting, as well.”

"So if you speak to a woman who is otherwise occupied, you’re sending a subtle message. It is that your desire to interact trumps her right to be left alone. If you pursue a conversation when she’s tried to cut it off, you send a message. It is that your desire to speak trumps her right to be left alone. And each of those messages indicates that you believe your desires are a legitimate reason to override her rights.

“For women, who are watching you very closely to determine how much of a threat you are, this is an important piece of data.”
 
Some posters on this thread clearly start from the assumption that a woman is lying, and then create a huge theory as to why she might be lying, rather than doing a fair weighing of the evidence on either side.
Pretty much. And I don’t think these people will behave the same way when their sister/female friend tell them about something they themselves experienced, honestly. I think lot of this disapproval is simply for the sake with disagreeing something with the feminism stamp on it, which can be seen by the unrealistic hypothetical situations and deflecting here. None of us are saying that we should believe every single allegation a woman makes. That is just dumb. Just don’t assume that someone is lying based on no evidence besides your belief that women lie about this ‘all the time’. And also ‘report to the police or act as if nothing happened’ is a stupid way of dealing with it and that it is never the victim’s fault for the rape/assault-it happens when the woman is wearing a burka or a bikini. Or a burkini.
 
I’ve compared it to how we treat thieves. I presume most people I’ve met aren’t thieves. However, when I’m eating out, I keep my purse wrapped around my leg at the table, or around the chair leg. I hang onto it on public transit. And if someone sits next to me I’m likely to keep a hand on it. Because I I know some people out there are thieves, and I know the thieves don’t wear anything identifying themselves as thieves.
And I don’t think these people will behave the same way when their sister/female friend tell them about something they themselves experienced, honestly.
The thing I would ask those people is - would you want your sister, or your female friend, to be hearing those messages? Because they do get inside your head. You do start thinking, well, I agreed to go over there, to do homework together, I flirted, maybe I don’t have the right to call it rape.

The story upthread where she didn’t call it rape but said “he had sex with me and I didn’t want to” is probably very common in those situations.
 
Replace every instance of men and women in that article with blacks and whites and you would accuse the author of being a member of the KKK.
 
Last edited:
And I don’t think these people will behave the same way when their sister/female friend tell them about something they themselves experienced, honestly.
It depends. If they are very vocal about their views on this stuff in real life, it’s likely that they are not going to be confided in.
I think lot of this disapproval is simply for the sake with disagreeing something with the feminism stamp on it,
Hopefully!
None of us are saying that we should believe every single allegation a woman makes. That is just dumb. Just don’t assume that someone is lying based on no evidence besides your belief that women lie about this ‘all the time’.
Right. Plus, arguing against 100% of cases isn’t even in accord with their own views. Even SST was estimating something like 40% false (correct me if I’m wrong, SST), which means that 60% are true. So by his own beliefs, he should expect to find that at least half of all accusations are credible.
And also ‘report to the police or act as if nothing happened’ is a stupid way of dealing with it
Right.

The thing I would ask those people is - would you want your sister, or your female friend, to be hearing those messages?
I’d add “your mom the rape victim,” “your sister the rape victim,” “your female friend the rape victim,” “your girlfriend the rape victim,” “your wife the rape victim,” or “your daughter the rape victim.”

Statistically speaking, at least one of those is eventually going to be true for the average guy–it’s just that he may never hear about it if he is well-known for doubting the honesty of accusers and for victim-blaming.

Worse yet, it could be “your grandma the rape victim”:


"Kpingbah’s one “unspeakable act,” he told the judge, was completely out of character.

“Yet in court documents uncovered by CNN, prosecutors revealed it wasn’t the first time Kpingbah had been investigated over sexual assault allegations. Personnel records obtained by prosecutors during the investigation and reviewed by CNN show Kpingbah was suspended three times as Walker Methodist officials investigated repeated accusations of sexual abuse at the facility, including at least two where he was the main suspect.”

Relatives said, “the officials there were quick to dismiss the residents’ claims as hallucinations or fantasies.”
 
Last edited:
Replace every instance of men and women in that article with blacks and whites and you would accuse the author of being a member of the KKK.
Not exactly, because she’s open to dating and having romantic relationships with men, she’s just cautious, and doesn’t default to assuming that any particular man is a good guy and has her best interests at heart.

Edited to add: Come to think of it, isn’t that your approach with women? You’re cautious and don’t default to believing that any particular woman is a good person and has your best interests at heart.

Again–we are looking at a double bind. On the hand, women are supposed to be very careful with men and we get blamed and shamed if we miscalculate and trust the wrong person. But on the other hand, many men (like yourself) find the elaborate security measures upsetting and insulting.

Another double bind is that many men want women to be sweet and nice and friendly all the time–but as you can see from the Schrodinger’s rapist piece, being sweet and nice and friendly all the time is not consistent with good personal security. Also, manosphere guys love submissive, docile women–but in the context of dating, the popular advice to “let him lead” is extremely unwise. And frankly, submissiveness during dating isn’t even that compatible with chastity–it’s too easy to submit one’s way right into bed. Chastity often requires a bit more steel in the personality, at least in the modern world where young women are expected to look after ourselves.

On a somewhat different subject, I’d like to mention to the Red Pill guys on the thread that it doesn’t make sense to explicitly treat women as second class citizens when your project depends on women’s cooperation for success. This whole “saving Western civilization” thing is not going to work out for you without women’s help.

I’d also like to point out that I think male Red Pill Catholics never seem to have any appreciation for the fact that just being a basic practicing Catholic requires tremendous heroism and self-denial from married women. It’s really gross how little understanding they seem to have of the physical risks involved in being a practicing Catholic married woman of childbearing age. We’re really putting our bodies on the line–and the thanks we get is getting to hear about how dishonest, cowardly and treacherous women are.
 
Last edited:
I think this thread has pretty much run its course. The metoo supporters are going to cave to Islam
OK, so now you’re sure that, of all people in this nation, it is going to be the feminists who cave in to the idea that all the women ought to be required to wear burkas, must be accompanied by a male relative in public, and so on?

Oh, that is a rich one. That is closer to what you hear from the date-rape-deniers–the adherents to the “if she isn’t bruised and I didn’t hear any screaming from next door, then I don’t believe that she really did say ‘no’” school of “thought”–not the feminists!
 
Also, our differing definitions of “light-hearted jokes” brought this to mind.
Yes, I’m sure the guy was actually lamenting that he had prepared his “murder kit” for nothing…

Or are you saying he was joking with a heavy heart?

The amount of reaching by the feminists to make this non-story fit their agenda would be laughable if they weren’t actually able to convince themselves that whatever construct they imagine becomes reality simply by virtue of their having constructed it.
 
Last edited:
Yes, I’m sure the guy was actually lamenting that he had prepared his “murder kit” for nothing…

Or are you saying he was joking with a heavy heart?

The amount of reaching by the feminists to make this non-story fit their agenda would be laughable if they weren’t actually able to convince themselves that whatever construct they imagine becomes reality simply by virtue of their having constructed it.
It might qualify as black humor, but not as a “light-hearted” joke, or the word “light-hearted” means nothing at all if it’s supposed to cover rape and murder.

People say what they are thinking about. Or as Luke 6 says, "45 The good man out of the good treasure of his heart produces good, and the evil man out of his evil treasure produces evil; for out of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaks.

See also Matthew 12:34, “34 You brood of vipers! how can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.”
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top