This thread has gone far enough. "Be kind." -Ilona Anne Coggswater

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

oftenreading said:

We have been dealing with he said/she said accusations for decades at least, so this is nothing new. For almost all of that time, society has decided to believe the men who deny accusations and tarnish the reputations of the women who made the accusations. Women lost not just jobs, but at times their lives. The current situation is a bit better; not perfect, but better. We are at least paying more attention to the accusations. 

And when we talk about false accusations, it’s important to remember the false denials as well. How many times have men vehemently denied accusations that were later shown to be true? Of course some accusations will be false, but it’s likely to be a small minority. 

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

brianlux said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

that's another idiotic statement to make, and further makes women out to be the lesser gender. seriously, women were empowered only because we gave them that power? jesus. 

That's now how I read it.  I think he means that we women have empowered themselves. 

But anyway, you know, that's the funny thing about celebrities- especially movie stars- all too often people look to them to be The Guiding Light.  They are just higher profile, that's all.  At least half of them are full of shit.  So let's maybe focus on the issue and not the stars.

Here again is my take:

-Women have been oppressed far too long.

-Many positive strides have been made by women, for women, in them becoming more liberated over the last 100 plus years.

-Men and women both should not tolerate abuse of women

But also this:

- There is a difference between flirtation and sexual harassment.I've been flirted with a number of time (oh, don't worry, I'm not tooting my own horn- it ain't happened that often, haha).  So does that mean that all the times women have flirted with me I should get up tight and call it sexual abuse?  No.  Should true sexual abuse and harassment be called out and dealt with appropriately?  HELL YES!  But know the difference.

And this:

-Movements can be great for instigating and promoting social change.  But movements can also be corrupted, co-oped, infiltrated, abused, exaggerated or any of the above.  It happens.  I've seen it happen. To not at least consider that #MeToo has, at the very least, in some case, been corrupted, is blind allegiance to a cause.  It's "True Believer" mentality.  I strong advise against that kind of thinking, especially for anyone who truly want to see the advancement of social justice.  Social justice is hard work.  It's being educated.  It's looking at the bigger picture. 

THIS IS TO NO ONE IN PARTICULAR HERE BUT, I'm actually mildly disturbed by some of the negative and what seem to me to be knee-jerk responses here.  Not meaning to offend.  This is an important issue.  It deserves to be done right.

cincybearcat said:

brianlux said:

I agree whole hardheartedly with what Allison, oftenreading, KAT and others have said here. But  I think my point got lost here. I will graciously duck out here. 

Ladies, you know I love ya, I'm all for you. 

And let's have a good, strong woman president for a change. 

Elizabeth...?

Weak sauce Brian. And Elizabeth warren is an awful choice 

PJPOWER said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

cincybearcat said:

PJ_Soul said:

brianlux said:

PJ_Soul said:

unsung said:

People are having careers ruined by a simple accusation on incidents that allegedly happened more than ten years ago.  

A little more proof should be required before convicting these people, but a simple accusation is all that seems to be needed.

Nobody is getting convicted without proof, that is a lie.

I also don't at all see how it happening 10 years ago changes anything - I don't feel bad for someone who has their career ruined because they are accused by a bunch of people of sexual abuse or misconduct (depending on the details of the misconduct), be it last week or 10 years ago.

I do think the specific circumstances matter though, and have said many times that any hysteria related to accusations is beyond unhelpful. I also think that there needs to be some room for redemption in some cases (not others). That does NOT mean the #metoo movement isn't valuable. I worry about the fact that people seem to want to either embrace the movement without any criticism, or focus on what you're saying and therefore reject it outright. It's just more hysteria.

We cannot, btw, rely solely on criminal convictions here. Accusers DO deserve a chance - a lot of mostly men seem to have decided to reject accusations altogether unless there are criminal charges, and that is not cool IMO. I 100% acknowledge that some women make false accusations..... But most do not. Yes, we need to be rational. The anti-#metoo'ers/accusation deniers are not being any more rational than those who don't know the difference between harmless flirting and sexual harassment or assault.

I really hope your not putting me in that category.  That would be a bit like saying I hate Dinosaur Jr! And what about Germaine Greer, one of the last centuries greatest Women's Rights advocates?  https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/jan/23/germaine-greer-criticises-whingeing-metoo-movement

No I wasn't Brian... Unsung maybe, though I'm only going off that one comment of his, and leaping to conclusions, lol. But if he needs proof in all cases, then that's not going to work. There is a well-established reason behind why accusations might not come out until years later, at which point no proof that would hold up in court exists (and likely never existed at all - it was a he said/she said from the beginning), even if the statute of limitations hadn't expired... And I'm not good with sexual predators getting off the hook that easily. Such crimes are NOT comparable to other crimes in terms of establishing proof, and those who think they are or should be don't understand the issue properly at all, nor the nature of the crime in most cases.

But really I was speaking generally - there are a LOT of people like that from what I can tell via the media/social media.

Wait - you don’t need proof?  That’s not how the legal system works. Or are you saying the court of public opinion doesn’t need proof?

Maybe I’m missing what you consider to be proof. 

depends what you consider proof. if there is no DNA from an instantly-reported rape, there really is no "proof". But, if you look at the facts, i.e; what each party stands to gain/lose, behaviour, witnesses, etc. 

I can't imagine many women would come forward and go to the lengths of being publically shamed and humiliated just because a guy dumped her or didn't pay attention to her at the bar or turned down her movie treatment. that would be downright psycho. 

Not to delude the movement, but i’ve seem women (and men) do some pretty psycho things after being dumped.  Logic and reason go out the window for some when angry or experiencing strong negative emotions.  The motive could merely be revenge.  I think that time frames do matter when recollection of events surrounding an allegation this serious come into play.  One of the first things a lawyer is going to do is attack the credibility of the accuser’s memory.