Has the #Metoo movement made men more unsure how to relate with women?

[BoyGenius]

I also think a lot of pro-life people fall victim to the idea that pro-choice people really believe that a fetus is a person, and have just decided that category of persons doesn’t count. In my experience, most pro-choice people simply believe a fetus is a potential person, not an actual person - usually due to some idea of consciousness or something similar being an integral part of being an actual person.

If you speak the truth. Know the truth (just as the MeToo campaign illustrates), then you would not simply go by what people believe. If some guys talk about some erotic view of women (especially in the framework of the hookup culture), and make comments about her body. Do you go along with it? Because after all, that’s how they look and believe a woman to be (i.e. objectified)? I then reason, you or I wouldn’t. For, you and myself would have the value and respect to another human being (i.e. the Golden Rule.) And therefore, would not neglect in illustrating and pointing out a fact to men who make comments that way.

Likewise, if I look at this topic: “Has the Metoo movement made men more unsure of how to relate with women?” I’d say, to a certain group of women (i.e. pro-choice), yes. Quite makes me unsure (in as much as it makes me unsure on how to relate to other men who make derogatory remarks about a woman’s body - which is sexually harassing to women.)

So with those men, I relay the same truth on the dignity and respect that they want owed to them, they’d want the same in return from someone with the opposite gender. And therefore would not go along to get along either. Same thing, when women are pro-choice and do not believe the intrinsic properties of human life in utero deserve to be treated with respect and dignity owed to them, it falls on the same sense of the Golden Rule (regardless of personhood.) Because, when a man looks at a woman, he is not seeing a person, but a body that is animated. Same thing, when a woman looks at an unborn child, she see’s (through trimester’s of pregnancy - even the cells and the heart beat, and the mind all active/moving at it were - thus an animated living human being (whether she thinks it, or calls it, or not.)

I then surmise to do with the same contentment, mind, character, and will as I would tell those men making derogatory remarks about w woman they see (about her body) the dignity and respect owed to that person. Simply telling both those men and pro-choice women, that’s a human being God made. And since it is to do with the dignity and respect to owed to them (regardless of personhood.) They should be respected the same. For slaves are human beings, even looking back at history. That’s because they are made in God’s image, and after His likeness, not personhood. And they are alive.

 

[on_the_hill]

Shakuhachi:

I have been unsure ever since a woman told me she was offended because a co- worker told her she “looked nice”.

Would the same co-worker go around telling men they look nice?

“Hey, Bob, looking good, baby!”

If you wouldn’t say it to a male co-worker, what makes you think it’s OK to say it to a female co-worker?

I learned from an experienced, respected attorney who specializes in workplace harassment lawsuits: it’s perfectly o.k. to compliment a coworker on his or her appearance so long as it’s not inappropriate.

A complaint about workplace harassment has to meet certain conditions to be founded. It has to create a hostile environment, it has to prevent the person from performing his/her job, it has to limit the the person’s employment opportunities. It has to be on-going. A one-time comment isn’t enough. And it has to be related to at least one of the 12 protected classes: sex, age, religion, ethnicity, etc. etc. etc.

 

[DarkLight]

If you speak the truth. Know the truth (just as the MeToo campaign illustrates), then you would not simply go by what people believe.

Erm…if the question is whether a given person is being consistent within their beliefs, have to go by their actual beliefs.

 

[Xantippe]

The topic, unless I am mistaken, was a forum topic. I expressed a contradiction among women who support abortion, but yet follow the MeToo campaign. It was a general view. Which about every topic on a forum opens a question to: the public.

I don’t think the topic specified who in the MeToo campaign this applied to (i.e. pro-life or non-pro-life.) But to the general public. And that is inclusive to those who support abortion. So, do you think in a forum soneone doesn’t have the right to call out that apparent contradiction of a certain group people in the MeToo movement?

I believe you’ve done that more than once.

You’re on the verge of sealioning–in fact, you’re probably there right now.

#1062; The Terrible Sea Lion

This sea lion has made the rounds. Also, a clarification on the sea lion character.

wondermark.com

 

[Xantippe]

I was thinking more of the simple fact that it can be easier to follow strict rules, than to truly develop virtue. Virginity is an easy yes/no question for someone to ask themselves. A lot of other rules require a good development of prudence and the ability to avoid justifying yourself.

Plus, we all start as virgins, so virginity is kind of a gimme.

 

[BoyGenius]

Erm…if the question is whether a given person is being consistent within their beliefs, have to go by their actual beliefs.

A person may believe a boat is not a boat. Or a rock is not a rock. So how shall I contend with them? Simple. First you point out an apparent fact and problem with that. Again, my illustration of men who stand at a distance looking at a woman with sexual derogatory remarks (which if she heard, would be sexually harassing to her.) And, hence does she feel in danger. And likewise, when a woman looks at an unborn child, ans says abort. That also proves about the same illustration: it is abusive and tormenting to an unborn human being. In fact, watch most abortions, a fetus trying to escape being killed. They move.

How a woman perceives life in the womb versus herself in the public square all has to do with her judgement, character, mind, temperament, and will. Which I therefore honestly have the right to judge (in as much as I will judge men who make sexual remarks about women.) And call it into question.

How would I have to describe that to a woman who is pro-choice? Well, that applies to men who were slave owners. The wonderful dictum of the U.S. has been the question of personhood. And yet, no human being earth started as a person, but in the womb of their mother. Thus, the question goes by whether the life is human. Because the characteristics and traits (i.e. hands, eyes, ears, etc.) are all their in the DNA carving out through the various stages of development. Which most interestingly fits in and subscribes to/with the Pre-Amble: We find these truths self-evident, inalienable rights. For the right of speech, clearly is spoken from someone’s mouth, and written by their hands. And since the unborn child develops that, it’s human, and is therefore required all the respect/dignity as a human being would have even leaving the womb. It does not change because someone does not view it that way. And a simple reminder to both men and women, the Constitution of the U.S. is where our laws subscribe, not what you or I might think about something. But the truth of what it is, and what it is for: Given by a Creator (which the founding Father’s of our Constitution) subscribed too as well. Hence the framework of our country.

 

[DarkLight]

What is your goal here? Is it to call the #metoo movement into question? Is it to say it shouldn’t apply to pro-choice women? Is it to tell a bunch of Catholics that other people shouldn’t support abortion?

Because it sure is sounding like “we can’t take a movement seriously if people who support it also support abortion.”

 

[Xantippe]

Because it sure is sounding like “we can’t take a movement seriously if people who support it also support abortion.”

By the way, you can also flip this.

You could just as easily say, “Pro-life people who don’t support MeToo are hypocrites! I can’t get behind the pro-life movement until each and every pro-life person supports MeToo!”

 

[BoyGenius]

Because it sure is sounding like “we can’t take a movement seriously if people who support it also support abortion.”

I called into question a correlation and current event to the MeToo movement. That’s what I did. And it was clearly demonstrated/illustrated that way. Siphoning it into your own thoughts and opinions are inside yourself, not mine.

There’s nothing wrong in pointing out an obvious cultural problem among people. And that was what I pointed out, an act of charity. Which is pointing out an obvious problem, If we are to do something about sexual harassment, thereby employing the dignity and respect owed to someone (mainly women). We should call out an obvious contradiction among women who support abortion. For, even an abortion covers a man who is sexually harassing her not only to get an abortion, but as well as she most often is being abused. Which falls under the stratosphere of sexual harassment. Thus a correlation.

My goal, to call out an obvious contradiction which undermines the Metoo movement. And as said, abortion gives cover for men who exploit women, sexually.

 

[DarkLight]

I called into question a correlation and current event to the MeToo movement

The trouble here is that we’re not sure what the question you’re calling is, and so far as I can tell you’re the only one here that this correlation is obvious to.

 

[BoyGenius]

The trouble here is that we’re not sure what the question you’re calling is, and so far as I can tell you’re the only one here that this correlation is obvious to.

So it is not obvious to you that women who support abortion undermine a human being’s value and dignity along with men who undermine her own dignity? And that is obvious.

 

[DarkLight]

So it is not obvious to you that women who support abortion undermine a human being’s value and dignity along with men who undermine her own dignity? And that is obvious.

Someone who supports abortion undermines the dignity of the unborn. I could see extending it to young children, based on the common view that requires consciousness or something similar as the relevant moral property.

I don’t see it as something that has some sort of undermining of the dignity of an adult human.

 

[BoyGenius]

I don’t see it as something that has some sort of undermining of the dignity of an adult human.

This is a “Catholic Answers Forum.” So first regard: "Thou shall not kill, covet, molest (i.e. harass.)

Second, in law, there’s no requirement of distinction in age when an expectant mother is killed, as the law classifies that as a double-homicide.

Third, since the Ten Commandments (hence quite illustrated on the context of the board), and along with the laws of this Country (no measure of personhood required, or age), then means they apply.

And yes that is a contradiction for anyone to classify laws to only certain members, wherefore, wherefore however,universal norms and laws that apply (for all - Liberty and Justice.)

 

[Shakuhachi]

That makes some sense.

 

[Xantippe]

Second, in law, there’s no requirement of distinction in age when an expectant mother is killed, as the law classifies that as a double-homicide.

That depends on the area.

 

[Xantippe]

This is a “Catholic Answers Forum.” So first regard: "Thou shall not kill, covet, molest (i.e. harass.)

Second, in law, there’s no requirement of distinction in age when an expectant mother is killed, as the law classifies that as a double-homicide.

Third, since the Ten Commandments (hence quite illustrated on the context of the board), and along with the laws of this Country (no measure of personhood required, or age), then means they apply.

And yes that is a contradiction for anyone to classify laws to only certain members, wherefore, wherefore however,universal norms and laws that apply (for all - Liberty and Justice.)

So, has the MeToo movement made men more unsure how to relate with women?

 

[BoyGenius]

So, has the MeToo movement made men more unsure how to relate with women?

I answered in a reply to DarkLIght.

So will just place it in my perspective (as I know I am not the only man. And since the question of men are not all men, so hence the answer to the question could not be that all men are more unsure how to relate to women.)

And my answer is that I am unsure how to relate to women who support abortion, and are yet against sexual harassment, no less I am unsure how to relate to men who make sexual derogatory remarks about women, but nonetheless themselves do not like to be mistreated (which can account for things like being bullied or even sexually harassed by other males.)

Based on the question, I can siphon my answer to a specific crowd of women. And therefore elaborate. Which I did.

 

[PetraG]

I was thinking more of the simple fact that it can be easier to follow strict rules, than to truly develop virtue. Virginity is an easy yes/no question for someone to ask themselves. A lot of other rules require a good development of prudence and the ability to avoid justifying yourself.

There many people who find the strict rule about avoiding all sexual relations with people not their spouses to be anything but easy. I would say in the current social climate and for a person with a typical libido, it takes a great deal of prudence, not to mention an ability to avoid rationalizing and justifying oneself, to remain a virgin prior to marriage. Society assumes you will violate this precept and some will even accuse you of a sexual disorder if you do not.

People who manage that do not deserve to be suspected of an accompanying spiritual fault any more than anyone else who manages to remain virtuous in any other respect. I’d actually say that it is more natural for a Christian who wants to be a saint to cultivate all the virtues simultaneously than to attempt to cultivate one at the expense of others.

 

[Rozellelily]

I’ve noticed that is a “thing” in America (Christian men seeking a virgin bride and even sometimes regardless of their own sexual past or mindset).
Here in Australia,it’s quite the opposite.
Ie:adults that are virgins would probably be thought of as weird etc as it’s so uncommon.

 

[Bruised_Reed]

Sexual harassment relates to abortion, because it is mainly an issue that affects women

Your view of the #metoo movement is too narrow. The woman who first coined the phrase did so as a response to the assault of a 13 year old girl, so why are you excluding children and men who are the victims of harrassment and assault? I don’t think you understand it and you’ve hijacked the thread for your own agenda. Your admission that you hadn’t heard of the movement before just confirms this.

Is that women who support abortion also speak out against sexual harassment

So?

[Everything else you said…]

You are really twisting this topic to your own agenda, that agenda being talking about abortion and/or referring to women in a derisive way because we’re all complicit in abortion somehow.

Do you really want the end of abortion? Or do you want to drive an even bigger wedge between women who are pro-choice (but not the men, I guess, including the men who made abortion legal ) and choosing life. Your approach serves no one but you. It does not serve the unborn, it does not serve women with crisis pregnancies , it does not serve families, it does not serve God.