Jesus, why are people such narcissistic assholes? #dont_be_a_dick

Clearly, people who throw #MeToo around shouldn't live in glass houses.

In the late 80's, I was working for Marriott in Minneapolis. We had a big event every year for our top corporate catering customers, who were usually women that were in charge of putting together lunches and such. They spared no expense, and the liquor flowed freely. Even the catering staff could drink, and we were expected to sit with the customers and visit with them.

One woman, who was probably in her late forties or early fifties, took a shine to me. I danced with her a few times, but then she started to get really handsy. I thought it would be best for everyone if I disengaged from the situation, but my boss (who was a horrible person, but sort of funny) said "You don't have fuck her. You just have to act like you want to fuck her". I was like 24 or something, so I went along with that dubious bit of advice, and we were finally able to pour her into a cab and send her home, but not before she had felt me up a few ways to Sunday and tried to stick her tongue down my throat.

That boss went on to open the new Mall of America Marriott, and claimed the corporate ladder even higher since then. I have no idea where he is now, but there would be all sorts of #MeToo stories about him.

@4: That's because you were both stoned assed drunk. Nothing would have bothered either of you.

@1 if anyone does this, where there are repercussions for rejecting their advances, it is pretty much workplace sexual harassment..

@3 I think it will bothered you, if it happens constantly, or the person is bigger, belligerent when you reject their advances or threatens violence. If it happens to a person a lot, or they get hit on every other day, it gets more into serious sexual harassment.. Guys may feel complimented by an sexual advance, but if you deal with it everyday, it becomes a burden..

Hmm, Al Franken didn't get to have any investigations. I guess its different.

@9: Not only did Franken have his only identified victim swiftly accept his apology, he received public support from many famous women, some of whom had worked with him for decades.

When the accused has exculpatory evidence on that level, the prosecution has no choice but leap past any semblance of a trial, and get right on with the lynching.

@12: Why, of course the ends justified the means, and who cares what the voters who elected Franken thought?

Meanwhile, one of the cover girls for the #MeToo movement demands the due process she has denied to others. How inspiring.

(Why can’t we get good candidates for public office? Truly a mystery, that...)

I’m gonna roll with 1,3,4 on this one. It’s not the same when a woman does it.

...Unless she’s your boss and she makes you “put it on the table” before you clock in every morning.

@Muffy & Ken

It's not about gender, it's about consent.

@4) Dude, those were not women.
And quite frankly nobody gives a shit about you.

@11) Prosecutors do not lynch people. And you should be much more careful in your use of the term "lynch", lest people think you were fucking stupid.

...should be much more careful in your use of the term "lynch",

It’s the classic American method for extra-judicial executions; why do you hate our great traditional American values? :-)

More seriously, one typical victim was a male accused of leering at a female; the lynch crew would often be upstanding local community leaders. What part of this metaphor do you not understand?

Shocker that the targets of #metoo aren't fundamentally different from the activists, no one could have predicted that, literally impossible, that's never happened before, this story is fresh and novel we should all be very surprised

So we should have different rules for women than we do for men? Although we already do. I've been groped and harassed by a handful of women, when I've protested being groped in a bar or club because I'm physically fit/muscular and dress nice, I'm looked at as if I'm a punk, or gay, or an "angry man". I wouldn't grope or touch a woman without her implied/or explicit consent (on a date for example), why are the rules different for women that keep saying they want to be treated equally. Equality means no "ladies night" at clubs, no wearing make up or tight mini skirt at work, it means that you don't get to slap me in the face then say that I can't hit you back, or for a female teacher to bang her students and get off easier than if a male teacher did the same thing. I often think that women don't want equality, just the good parts of it and not the uncomfortable ones (like paying for bloody dates and getting the same jail sentence for the same crime). Let's treat each other equality without special entitlements or treatment based on gender.

@23 you say it like populists political movements have never happened before.

@22 It's an interesting question. My take is that there are some meaningful differences, but the most harmful ones are self-imposed. Firstly, the obvious: I'm a man, and it's very unlikely, stronger than me or not, that a woman would ever attempt to physically compel me to do what she wants, mostly for biological reasons (pretty sure willingness to use violence is a sex-based trait) but also for social reasons.

The bigger "problem" as I see it is the victimization-enforcement uh... complex. Like, most sexual assault is purely cultural-contextual. Having a boob grabbed isn't a meaningful injury, but it's considered a violation by sociey for which women should view themselves as weak, helpless (and, in the most modern twist, angry) for having that happen to them. They're encouraged to feel devastated at their lack of autonomy. They're encouraged to grab that "victim" mantle and share their story.

Now, I'm a man. I've been pinned against a wall and groped and kissed against my will; i've had my genitals grabbed about by female strangers maybe 5 or 6 times in my life. Although I do carry some frostiness over this, what's never happened is that I've never been encouraged to feel like a "real" victim; to feel powerless or helpless. I remember reading Brock Turner's Victim's Impact Statement, and somewhat marveling about the depths of her pain for an incident she had no recollection of occurring - how does one come to feel that way without considerable outside pressure?

So what's the response? Is there a way to encourage women to not feel like victims that isn't some combination paternalistic/nihilistic? Would this lessen the psychic impact? Would making these crimes less of a big deal lead to more occurrences? If they weren't a big deal, would it be worthwhile tradeoff?

@26 now do the next step: am I better off for being given the privilege to essentially ignore what happened to me, or is Turner's victim better off for reliving her experience as deeply as she has?

@28 that's exactly what happened tho, right? You seem to think it is correct to ensure that victims become traumatized. What's the argument for that? (Never mind, you already said you don't have an argument to support that). Who wins? Certainly not the victims, what we do now is try to maximize the victim's suffering and trauma. For what purpose?

Sportlandia @24

Well, rape-by-envelopment is a thing, but generally I'd think that serious injury/ violence is statistically much less likely for someone (male or female) subject to unwanted female advances, thus it's easier to see them for what they actually are rather than what they have come to (recently, more so) symbolise and stand for.

But you're absolutely right that women, especially young women, nowadays are actively encouraged to interpret every unwanted sexual touch (or even talk) as major violation and of course it's culturally conditioned.

There must be some middle path between dismissing less serious assaults as just part of life which women should just put up with and encouraging fragile/victim mentality that perceives everything as major trauma. Maybe it will emerge from the current flux.

Generally though, this particular story shows that abuse/exploitation (even sexual, though admittedly it seems that men in positions of power abuse this power to get sex more often than women in positions of power) is about power imbalance than "identarian" traits such as gender.