Are We Americans Capable of Entering Into Rational, Honest, and Productive Discusion Over Sensitive Matters?...
Rape - The crime of rape generally refers to non-consensual sexual intercourse that is committed by physical force, threat of injury, or other duress. Common law defined rape as unlawful intercourse by a man against a woman who is not his wife by force or threat and against her will.
A sexual predator is a person seen as obtaining or trying to obtain sexual contact with another person in a metaphorically predatory or abusive manner.
Pedophilia is considered a paraphilia, an "abnormal or unnatural attraction." Pedophilia is defined as the fantasy or act of sexual activity with prepubescent children. Pedophiles are usually men, and can be attracted to either or both sexes. How well they relate to adults of the opposite sex varies.
Sexual harassment is bullying or coercion of a sexual nature, or the unwelcome or inappropriate promise of rewards in exchange for sexual favors. In most modern legal contexts, sexual harassment is illegal. As defined by the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), "It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person's sex."
Inappropriate sexual behavior, or sexually aggressive behavior, is a term which encompasses a variety of behaviors, including obscene gesturing, touching or hugging another person, exposing body parts or disrobing, and masturbating in public.
Burden of proof - the obligation to prove one's assertion.
Our nation has been focused on the perceived (or real) inapropriate behavior of a growing multitude of individuals that include to wit, political personalities, media personalities, and Hollywood personalities.
The definitions above, although perhaps not a complete list of behaviors most reasonable folks find unsettling they are clearly close enough.
Given the current discussions and information we have on individuals facing allegations of sexual misbehavior do any, some, or all actually fit the above definitions?
Pease pay close attention to the last on the list, Burden of prof when giving your reply.
This post is an attempt to open an honest and forthright discussion on sexual misbehavior, how the media should respond if at all, how the political class should respond if at all, and why you believe so.
All honest and positive comments will be posted for discussion. Comments disparaging any blogger, regardless of political alignment, WILL BE DELETED immediately upon detection. All OT comments WILL BE DELETED immediately upon detection.
We look forward to a lively, meaningful, and positive discussion.
Leadership sets the tenor and tone of a nation. I don’t think a rational and productive discussion is possible until honesty and integrity returns to our public life. This will require new leaders.
ReplyDeleteLes, Thank you for posting this. First, we must define our terms. Too many people are throwing everything into one huge bucket and nevermind the context. Heaven help you if you even bring up context or attempt to understand a situation. People will accuse you of "supporting pedophiles" or whatever, when all you are really trying to do is get to the truth and figure out what happened and why.
ReplyDeleteDialog in this nation suffers from a lack of reason and charity. Everybody goes off half-cocked, blasting away, and taking everyone else's comments in the worst possible light. Productive debate and frank conversation that leads to understanding and improvement is impossible in such an environment.
Good to see you both here!
ReplyDeleteBoth comments speak to truth and therefore are ground on which to begin reasoned dialogue and building understanding between often opposing views of reality.
Steven Covey said it best, Seek fist to understand, then to be understood.
It seems to me facilitating open, honest, and productive discussions requires first and understanding of Corey's observation.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe use of vulgar language for no purpose other than to insult another blogger OR this weblog is cause for immediate deletion.
DeleteBug bye ASfT.
The attempt to control such discussions by using ideosyncratic definitions and terminology is de Regueur. We hear, or have heard such statements as "rape is murder" and "pornography is rape" and "rape is not about sex" and more, which change from time to time and from argument to argument. They are deliberate obstacles to objective and solution based discussion and designed to unite the base by framing the case.
ReplyDeleteIt would be nice to work with defined and agreed upon terms, but that's not easy or possible. I think Silverfiddle is quite right. If "they" want to disparage anyone, they have the tools to do it and we help them by confusing grievances with wisdom or virtue or good will. Paying respect to due process and the burden of proof is difficult of course, as the urge for redress, or revenge are often mixed with a real concern for justice and hence the support for the equal protection of the law, the presumption of innocence and rules of evidence are less popular as emotion rises. Someone has to pay, right and of course any deviation is heresy.
Lack of reason and charity? Hell yes! Discussion is based on an objectivity, humility and respect that seem to have been swept away along with the notion of mankind as a species motivated primarily by reason. I'll be interested to see what ensues. and thanks RN for trying.
Fine points all Capt.!
DeleteAs I read this, several times, I found myself focusing on defined and agreed upon terms. Perhaps there are difficult to arrive at but I think it possible. But, and its a large but, everyone must understand the terms agreed to and honors the integrity of the agreement.
The problem as I see it is that perceptions and emotions play a huge part in most human interactions and preconceived opinions sometimes creep in and sabotage a persons best intentions of remaining objective.
As for redress and or revenge, neither should be a concern until such time as guilt, based on a preponderance of evidence has been established. But of course in the court of public opinion, where emotion and the desire to pass judgement based on innuendo and appearances holds sway over evidence and reason none of that matters.
I now will simply echo your closing lines Capt. Lack of reason and charity? Hell yes! Discussion is based on an objectivity, humility and respect that seem to have been swept away along with the notion of mankind as a species motivated primarily by reason.
RN... You asked "Given the current discussions and information we have on individuals facing allegations of sexual misbehavior do any, some, or all actually fit the above definitions?"
ReplyDeleteThe answer is of course! Or not...
Depending on the person doing the perceiving. Or the person interpreting the definitions above. For example...
A guy in a company asks a girl out, completely 100% innocent on his part. He just woke up one day and after working around this person for a year noticed he was attracted to her. The problem is he's a supervisor and he's thinking he'd be totally willing if it works out to go to another department.
But in his asking, she felt threatened, because of the difference in rank.
Harassment? She felt it was. He was clueless.
I doubt the lines will ever be as hard and fast as we would want them. Truth is, I've been scouring my memory banks for a couple of weeks. There's plenty of stuff I said back in the 70's and 80's as a boss that were innocent then but would be a problem today.
Ethics and mores change over time. So in fact does theology, which drives the Christian church.
Our world, definitions, words and culture are much more to the dynamic side of the scale, as opposed to the static side. And that, I believe, is what makes so much of this difficult.
All that said, Roy Moore? Guilty. My son went to school in Alabama at Auburn. As an outsider, he hails from Las Vegas, he had a different experience than the locals, and learned a lot about their culture. He tells me "Of course he's guilty." And everyone knows it.
For me, as a church guy, I can tell you from experience that as far a Bill Clinton understood, in the culture where he was raised, Southern Redneck/Evangelical, he "did not have sex with that woman!" Sure, he was sexual, but he did not have sex.
Sex for those men, both Clinton and Moore, in their cultures, was the final deed. Anything else... foreplay.
Just sayin...
A guy in a company asks a girl out, completely 100% innocent on his part. He just woke up one day and after working around this person for a year noticed he was attracted to her. The problem is he's a supervisor and he's thinking he'd be totally willing if it works out to go to another department.
DeleteBut in his asking, she felt threatened, because of the difference in rank.
Harassment? She felt it was. He was clueless.
Real story. That was ME 33 years ago. We've been happily married for 30 years.
Difference? I was smart enough to ask if she would feel offended or threatened in any way.
For me your example highlights two key points. Stupidity on the part of some males, and, the willingness on the part of some females to destroy a man's reputation or career.
I do not know if Roy Moore is guilty or not as there has been no hard evidence available to support that he in fact is. But if cultural norms are to be considered the basis of judgement then as you point out both Moore and Clinton would be considered innocent based on the cultural standards of what is a bygone era.
And yes... it's good to see Capt Fogg and Silver here.
ReplyDeleteYes, of course things change, develop, evolve - and that includes mores and morals and codes of behavior. I read today that a nurse has been fired from an Indiana hospital for tweeting that "white boys should be sacrificed to the wolves" 40 years ago, when Marilyn French's book, The Women's Room" expressed much the same grizzly sentiment, she was hailed as a heroine of the women's movement. Why stand up for justice - we want revenge!
ReplyDeleteOf course that sentiment lives in some women. Anger and hate keep spawning ugly things even if they come from legitimate grievances. "Time makes ancient good uncouth" is a quote I've about worn out and it's true. We need to upgrade ourselves more thn we need to denigrate others, methinks - but what do I know?
Such man-bashing hatred still lives but perhaps the movement has matured a bit and become more responsible. in 77 you got hired, in 17 you get fired. But you don't dare to mention such things in some very angry circles - not if you're male. Males are the enemy, say the leaders, rallying the troops.
I'm speculating we've changed a bit because of fewer "leaders" and their extremist authoritarianism, but the spirit of establishing talking points, rigid terminology and restricting allowable questions still lives.
I've been resoundingly excoriated and insulted for suggesting that we still have to worry about these tendencies today in social movements of all sorts. Blame seeking, scapegoating and the punitive spirit are still much alive. I think that these attitudes are counterproductive and dangerous. but that hasn't worked out well for me when I mention it.
If we want to foster respect and equality between genders we have to fight not only ancient attitudes in our religious beliefs and we have to re-educate men about respect and compassion instead of generalizing about them, berating and insulting them, and more importantly, we have to stop excluding them from discussions and actions. Wronged people can often be wrong and someone needs to temper the rage.
This sort of sectarianism seems to dominate even the most sincere attempts to make things better. Leaders don't always approve, and feel threatened. "We're the victims and you're the enemy and we won't listen." Honi soit qui mal y pense is my current response. Evil opinion has evil results or "these violent delights have violent endings as the priest said to Romeo.
Movements do tend to take their survival and the authority of their leaders seriously and such things can become the movement itself while the "conversation" dies for lack of air. Anyway, I should have learned long ago what I've been saying for years - there is no rational discussion on some subjects and I should recognize that and that the meek certainly will be ground into the dust while justice lies howling. I've not been blogging much of late for this reason. I'm just too disillusioned and fatalistic and worn out.
People seem to want heaven on earth and nothing less, but they really don't. They want victory.
Anxious to here what y'all have to say, cause after all - what do I know?
Capt... I'm wondering, reading your response, how the current political climate that seems to need, or even require, a binary choice on all of this affects moving forward.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, can someone have made a mistake, or even a couple, but not be a predator?
Or, is everyone who "did those things" to be seen as a harasser.
Does it have to be either/or? Or, is there some middle ground?
At least in this instance.
Maybe, I don't know in general. I'd have to see specifics and of course people change - sometimes. Christopher Hitchens once said that there's a difference between a homosexual act and being a homosexual. maybe that's true and maybe that applies to other things, but again, I don't know.
DeletePeople don't need to "Please pay close attention to Burden of proof" when forming an opinion. That is a standard for conviction in court, not conviction in the court of public opinion. My opinion is that Roy Moore is guilty. Also that Trump is guilty. People who say they did it are obviously guilty, but denying charges does not make one innocent. Trump and Moore seem to think it does. According to what I've heard, Trump is now suggesting the Access Hollywood tape was fake in some way. More and more every day I'm leaning toward the conclusion that Trump is a delusional confabulator to whom truth and reality has no real meaning. Actually, I reached that conclusion awhile ago and Trump keeps reconfirming that I was right over and over.
ReplyDeleteBTW (and on the SAME TOPIC) I posted an agreeable comment on FT's blog under the handle "Sexual Harassment Is A Man's Right!" but FT didn't like what I had to say. And he denied the OBVIOUS misogyny his post seethes with. This fact (that FT is a HUGE misogynist) making me curious as to what RN meant (when he wrote on FT's blog) "from your response I assume your views on feminism runs parallel to my own". Is RN joking or is he confirming that he is also a misogynist? I mean, as per FT, feminists (AKA "feminazis") and the Left have fabricated the entire notion of "sexual harrassment" and the case against Roy Moore is tantamount to the Salem Witch trials.
Some people are BEYOND reasoned dialogue. FreeThinke is clearly one such person.
Let me make something PERFECTLY CLEAR, this is not a post to express ones personal views on any particular blogger you happen to disagree with. Take your grievances elsewhere. Thanking you in advance.
DeleteBut since you brought it up, lease note I do not want, nor will I post, a response. I highly disagree with your highly partisan analysis with respect to FreeThinke. Yes, I am in disagreement with many of his views, but he is consistent, his reasoning is based on logical premises, and, I have concluded he is anything but an evil ad unprincipled man.
Do you remember our progressive friend Jersey McJones, who recently passed due to metastatic cancer? Jersey understood FreeThinke, as well as respected him, more than any other liberal or progressive in blogistan. I've found myself reflecting on how Jersey interacted with FreeThinke and how he was able to interact with FreeThinke yet never compromise his own principles and values.
Jersey was a sincere and respectful man, I learned from my observations and interactions with Jersey. I won't be so bold to suggest anyone else do the same, but, just sayin...
BTW, re Capt. Fogg's comment... how could anyone have tweeted anything 40 years ago? I'm pretty sure Twitter hasn't been around that long.
ReplyDeleteNo, boys shouldn’t be sacrificed to the wolves. I have a son and grandsons, I would never agree to that.
ReplyDeleteAs the only female to join the discussion, I will try to get you to understand why a lot of us women have a certain attitude toward this sexual predation/harassment subject. Why we appear angry, want something done! Not revenge. No. Something. Attention must be paid.
I was six years old when a non-blood-related relative began his sexual molestation on me. I remember feeling confused, scared, but mostly scared. Where does a six year old child go with a secret as dark and horrid as that? I had no power. I was preyed upon for years until I took control as an older pre-teen and refused to visit his home with my parents. They never knew why; I just wouldn’t go. That was my secret until adulthood when I sought therapy for various issues that were haunting my life and causing me to act out, to hurt myself. I will just say that psycho-therapy helped me to understand why I tried to do destructive things to myself. The man who committed these crimes against me lived to a ripe old age, adored and respected by his family. I never told anyone. He died never knowing the trauma he caused in my life.
Do men understand that I am not alone in having this experience? That this is a male problem? I don’t know why that is, but we should be more open about it so that young girls don’t carry this around and have to seek psychiatric help before they harm themselves.
As an adult woman I was sexually assaulted by my gynecologist. After an exam! I didn’t report him, but changed doctors immediately. He was a highly respected physician in a leading Boston hospital. I kept quiet.
When my children were in high school, I decided to go back into the working world. I answered an ad in our local paper for a man who wanted clerical help. His office was in the basement of his home in a toney suburb of Boston. The second or third time I worked with him, his hand reached to my inner thigh. I jumped up and left. He called the next day and asked if I would be back. I said no. He asked why. I said, “Are you kidding me, you know very well why.” And hung up.
My experiences are not unusual. Almost every woman I know has had some sort of sexual predation or harassment in her life, some very serious, some not so serious. This is a problem. I know many of you are good, loving husbands, fathers, brothers, sons, and would never engage in such things, but what about the men who do and who pay no price for their crimes?
What about the women who have come forward in Roy Moore’s case and other cases like his? Forty, thirty, twenty years is a long time, but does that mean that what happened to them isn’t wrong? Were they, like me, intimidated? Did they feel powerless to do anything? Would anyone have believed them? Is what happened to me and them unimportant?
What about the men who commit these crimes against girls and women? What should be done with them? What should the punishments be for the various sexual crimes be? How do we teach boys and men that they need to respect girls and women? How do we teach girls and women to respect themselves?
No one I know is trying to indict all boys and men. I and other women just want this to stop, to be acknowledged, and for men to acknowledge that this happens to girls and women and that it has to stop.
First I must say the experiences you suffered at the hands of those men are were reprehensible as well as intolerable acts. Respect for the other person (as well as oneself) should guide all human interactions. Period.
DeleteSociety's efforts to educate folks on these real life situations is reasonable and proper. I for one both admire and respect those who share their stories of as you have here. My own mother was the object of sexual predation that turned to rape when she was a teenager. I never knew this until my father in his last year of life shared this with me. Perhaps that is why I am more sympathetic and willing to listen to the stories of young women, who like my beloved mother, were victimized at the hands of disgusting males. I'm certain she never said anything out of shame and for the same reasons you chose not to say anything. Enough of that.
Thank you Shaw for sharing what must have been a most difficult story to share. Hopefully, in some small way it will help to raise the consciousness level on this very real issue.
I will add that while the great majority of women are honest there exists a small number that use the law to act out in vengeance against men for various nefarious reasons. I know this as fact because my ex sister in law, a psychologist, said as much. And a conservative she ain't. Which is the reason we must be careful in jumping to conclusions and judgment.
I've heard so many stories from women I know well that I do believe that it's widespread. In that it's prompted me to ask, perhaps all the outcry has been educational. It's bewildering for a man who thinks he knows his friends and acquaintances well. I don't know anyone - or I think I don't - that would do such things and I've never been aggressive with women, but what is sad in the extreme is how many or most women hide these things. I'm not saying I don't understand why, but it's sad and it helps perpetuate it. just the other day, my wife recounted a story and hinted that there were more and I've known her for 35 years. Why just now? Yes, it was before she knew me, but I would have taken action and I like to think nearly all men would have - and of course by "action" I mean things it's best not to announce.
DeleteBut yes, there are a small number and I know of some cases where men's lives were ruined over it, but apparently it's not a good thing to mention that so I won't, except to note that just the other day, a women went to the WaPo with a phony story about Roy Moore about a fake molestation. Turns out she works for the same bastards who ruined ACORN and tried to ruin Planned PArenthood. This was an attempt to destroy that newspaper. But I hardly blame that on women.
But really I would rather go after real offenders and real offences and not elevate a pinch to a rape because it allows cynics to dismiss the whole thing.
...the great majority of women are honest there exists a small number that use the law to act out in vengeance against men for various nefarious reasons.
ReplyDeleteIs it a logical premise to say that feminazis, unfeminine lesbians, angry ugly women, "power whores" and the Left have fabricated the entire notion of "sexual harrassment"????? (Quotes around "sexual harrassment" to show it isn't a term to be taken seriously). I have ZERO respect for anyone who would suggest such a thing. Let alone believe in it strongly.
As for you definitions, the one you have above for "rape" sounds like what a Republican would call "forcible rape" or "legitimate rape". Although you do write "generally", rape can occur when a woman is drunk/otherwise impaired or via mental coercion. Additionally I'd note that rape absolutely can occur within a marriage.
BTW, in addition to pedophilia, there is hebephilia (a strong, persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent children, which is typically ages 11–14) and ephebophilia (primary sexual interest in mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19).
Finally, have you heard that Republican operative James O'Keefe (of the edited/highly deceptive ACORN hit job videos) sent a woman to the WP with a false story about Roy Moore (he paid for her to have an abortion) in order to discredit them? The WP discovered her deception. Proof that the WP did their homework re the accusers who they did cite and that their stories are TRUE and not a "scheme by the liberal elites and Republican establishment".
I just want to add that I have no idea of what a graph of sexual offenses against women against time would look like, but I suspect that the uproar today suggests that there is a growing intolerance and a growing demand for doing something and perhaps we can hope these things may be or may soon be on the decline in our country.
ReplyDelete"But really I would rather go after real offenders and real offences and not elevate a pinch to a rape because it allows cynics to dismiss the whole thing."
ReplyDeleteI understand what is meant by that. But once "a pinch" on a girl's or a woman's bottom is seen as merely a nuisance instead of unwanted touching, what's next? A hand on the breast, a hand on the innder thigh? This is not to say that a pinch is the same as a rape, but once that pinch is dismissed as harmless playfulness, then what's next?
Capt. Fogg hit on something important: why was all this kept secret? Good question. There may be many reasons, but I think the most probable is that the victims felt shame (there is so much shame associated with human sexuality!) and fear of being blamed. In my case, as a 6 year old child, I was scared. The man was an adult, big and strong. My fear was reasonable.
One small solution is to give women the courage to speak out loudly and angrily anytime an unwanted touch is experienced. We've had successful campaigns that have shamed cigarette smokers and drunk drivers, surely we can come up with a way of not making it acceptable for certain men to engage in unwanted touching, groping, kissing, sexual talk, etc.
How will this all work? I don't know, but somehow men and women will be able to come to an agreement on what is wrong and what is socially acceptable. At this point, I don't know what that is. Is a compliment on one's appearace sexually suggestive? I wouldn't think so, but some women do. Would an acceptance of a harmless compliment lead to unwated touching? It all depends on who the man is.
The first step is to bring this out into the open so that we can see how widespread it is, and then we have to come to some agreement on how to stop it. I have to believe this problem can be solved. It can't continue
The first step is to bring this out into the open so that we can see how widespread it is, ...
ReplyDeleteAgree. Without data, management is impossible. Not to equate business management to human interactions, but, the principle applies to both. Quantification of a problem is the first step in reducing the problem, with the goal of eliminating it.
Way to Mr. President. Mr. Trump speaks the truth Trump speaks with sincerity ..
ReplyDeleteNo BS just plain honesty and calling it as he sees it. Dizzy Lizzy Warren lies to get a special deal for College entry and course acceptance by saying she is native American.
Dizzy Lizzy Warren is a Certifiable Nut. Can you imagine if had Sarah Palin gotten a free ride to college and a $340,000 job for claiming tat she was an Eskimo, because she had high cheekbones?
Lizzy lied and has earned the Pocahontas title for the rest of her miserable lying life.
I find it refreshing that we FINALLY have a president who speaks so honestly and like a real person. The fact is Lizzy “Dizzy” Warren is a lying hypocrite who used fake Native American heritage to secure a job. She's a moonbat fraud Her name should be “Spreading Bull”. Calling Warren, Pocahontas, is a perfect and benign tease, one which Dizzy Warren has earned by her patronizing her highly questionable association with Native Americans.
And pleeeese don’t tell me that it’s in “Bad Taste”. Since when is telling the truth "Poor Taste"? Warren is a Fake Indian who real Indians laugh at!
Either stay ON TOPIC and RELEVANT TO THE POST or get your arse deleted. This post has nothing to do with Elizabeth Warren, Sara Palin or their issues, either real or perceived.
DeleteConsider this fair warning if you wish to post here. Either follow the rules or stay out. Next time you WILL BE DELETED.
Les... he's spam. The same comment has been left at various sites. Why not just delete him?
ReplyDeletenow... back to the topic...
I think something has been overlooked in a lot of the discussions of the Roy Moore debacle and it's fear.
If a woman is the sole breadwinner for her family, and at her job get harassed or molested, perhaps by her boss, what were her recourses years ago? My parents divorced in the early 70's and my mom maintained our house and put food on the table for me and my brother.
She was an nurse at a local hospital and frequently had to put up with rude, ugly and offensive behavior from male doctors, lab techs, etc that today would never be tolerated. But back then, to bring it up meant almost certain loss of job.
I have no doubt there are millions of women in the same boat today as my mom would have been were she still alive.
They kept quiet and suffered out of a sense of duty for their families.
It's disgusting when I hear people today remark that "if it did happen, why wait until today?"
Maybe there we no good options back then. Especially in a world where women would not have been believed.
I think something has been overlooked in a lot of the discussions of the Roy Moore debacle and it's fear.
DeleteIf a woman is the sole breadwinner for her family, and at her job get harassed or molested..
Good point Dave, and it is one reasons medium to large companies begin implementing sexual harassment education and training for their employees. Training of those in authority (power) positions, supervisors, superinrendents, and managers were especially targeted. Both on how they could be a target of a complaint if they acted inappropriately as well has how to respond to a complaint.
The companies I worked for put in place protocols and proceedures that attemted to insure those with a complaint felt at ease making a claim as well insuring confidentiality when requested if it was it was possible to do so.
I was fortunate to have worked for a company that "got it" and took seriously their responsibility to maintain a working environment free of sexual harassment and or hostility.
(O)CT(O)PUS said it best, Leadership sets the tenor and tone of a nation. I don’t think a rational and productive discussion is possible until honesty and integrity returns to our public life. This will require new leaders.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteTTTT... I think the issue is the topic. Commenters don't get to determine the subject in polite, respectful communities.
ReplyDeleteWhile someone may indeed post something true, that doesn't make it germane to the discussion.
Why is that so hard for ppl to understand?
Les has asked people to respect that, hasn't he? It's his blog, and as AOW says, his rules!
Even if I run an open thread post where any topic would be welcomed for discussion vulgarity, as well as disparaging/derogatory remarks about other bloggers, irrespective of political leanings, would be deleted.
DeleteRespect and civility must be maintained if there is any hope of productive dialog aimed at finding common ground and effective compromise.
The sooner our political environment and leaders return to recognizing that in the final analysis only a WIN-WIN can truly succeed the better off we'll all be.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteFrom my perspective, a useful dialogue on this topic is difficult because of how the issue is (and has always been) politicized. In America (and elsewhere), if you want to destroy someone’s character in a political campaign, accuse them of inappropriate sexual behavior or moral turpitude. There are two separate issues here, but we’ve muddled it all up into one issue, and I think doing so is dangerous to a society that (at least) professes a desire to “progress.”
ReplyDeleteIn my judgment, it doesn’t matter who perpetrates assaults (man or woman, politician or business executive, teacher or priest); what matters is that all allegations must be taken seriously, investigated by professionals, and dealt with in an appropriate matter. Of equal value, publishing how the matter was resolved. I do not think that offering a public apology comes close to an appropriate resolution.
There must be one corollary to these situations, however; whomever tenders an unsubstantiated allegation must be punished for doing so ... and here I am only suggesting that every party in such matters must be held to account. We want justice in our society, but we also need to perceive justice in our society.
There is another situation involved here. I apologize if I do not speak to this clearly, but I’ll give it a try. Social media contributes to information overload. What I detest about this is that hardly anything of what I read in the media is designed to inform as much as it is designed to anger us and keep us at one-another’s throats. I honestly do not care about Judge Moore; I don’t live in Alabama. I refuse to give up a minute of my time to engage with anyone on this topic. I also realize that the political structure will do what it wants no matter what I think about it. Personally, in light of all the fake news and phony dossiers, the partisan divide in this country is as wide as I’ve ever seen over the past 60 years, I’ve all but given up on our society. Perhaps we should let it collapse upon itself; maybe in time, our communities will be able to produce a better caliber of people. But, given what we know about Rome, I doubt it.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteWelcome Mustang, and, thank you for your thoughtful and respectful comments. Comments such as the ones you made allow for productive dialog.
DeleteIt is true there does exit unethical and unprincipled individuals who will use the system (law) to destroy another’s livelihood and or reputation. It is also true that the media, left leaning, right leaning, and social engages in muddling the issue. Because of this emotions and temperatures only continue to rise. As for those individuals who act unethically and make unfounded allegations? When the allegations are proven to be made with malice they indeed should be held accountable and appropriately punished. What would be your suggestion as to appropriate punishment?
… it doesn’t matter who perpetrates assaults (man or woman, politician or business executive, teacher or priest); what matters is that all allegations must be taken seriously, investigated by professionals, and dealt with in an appropriate matter. Spot on Mustang! I bet few, if any, would disagree with that. Except perhaps those guilty of having done the dirty deed(s).
Anyone who attempts to minimize, or worse yet deny, the existence of sexual misbehavior, sexual harassment, sexual predation, sexual assault, or rape by individuals in positions of authority and power are simply kidding themselves while trying to convince others there isn’t a problem. Perhaps FreeThinke suggestion of a statutes of limitations on allegations makes sense. At some juncture down the line. When society accepts it has a problem.
Neither do I give a tinker’s damn about Judge Roy Moore, for me, as well as my entire family I’m sure, he has about as much personal value as a gust of wind in the desert on a hot day. What is important is that the very necessary discussion about a very real problem be had. That is to say, the apparent acceptance that boys engaging in inappropriate behaviors with respect to sexual conduct just amounts to boys being boys or locker room talk.
Perhaps we should let it collapse upon itself; maybe in time, our communities will be able to produce a better caliber of people. But, given what we know about Rome, I doubt it.
Perhaps, and, you’re right about Rome.
I have heard it argued that recompense never reaches the level of justice being served. On the one hand, one cannot return serenity to a woman who is raped. Sending the rapist to jail serves to punish the offender, but it does little to bring peace to the victim. Likewise, how does the law compensate someone for the loss of their reputation. I am thinking of the case of the Duke students who now remain scarred for life (or the better part of it). Of course, these young men did place themselves in an unenviable and dangerous situation, and looking around at society today, I cannot say that any meaningful lessons were learned by others. These young men were foolish and there are consequences for even that. In any case, punishment is always inadequate from the standpoint of the victim, and yet, some punishment for false accusers might have a positive effect if nothing more than giving one pause to consider the consequences for making spurious allegations. I would be willing to place this into the hands of a jury of peers —let them decide. The current situation among so many prominent men would seem to defeat the argument set forth by FreeThink. If these wayward individuals realize that there are no statute of limitations for such crimes, it may in some cases moderate their behaviors. Thank you for allowing me to participate in the discussion.
DeleteMustang said... "There must be one corollary to these situations, however; whomever tenders an unsubstantiated allegation must be punished for doing so ... and here I am only suggesting that every party in such matters must be held to account. We want justice in our society, but we also need to perceive justice in our society."
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting thought. I wonder how this might be adjudicated? Would a not guilty verdict in a rape case "prove" the victim was not raped? Or might there be times where an assault indeed did take place, and the accused was guilty, but it could not be proved to a level to bring charges or prevail in a court of law?
The reality of not winning some days in court, either with a judge or public opinion, does not mean the assault, harassment or abuse did not take place.
How do you propose we punish people in these types of instances?
BTW... I largely agree on the social media issue... it does contribute to media/information overload.
RN: Neither do I give a tinker's damn about Judge Roy Moore...
ReplyDeleteNot sure what you mean by this. I thought Moore was a big part of this discussion. He is clearly guilty yet the #trumpdupes defend him and say the accusers are paid liars. And it's due to Moore's success (in denying everything) that Trump thinks he can now say the Access Hollywood tape is fake. The reaction by some (complete denial) will be what happens when Robert Muller presents his case against Trump.
The first comment by Captain Fogg above (reply feature isn't working for me) makes an important point. One lazy but popular way to win an argument is to define any opposing view as illegitimate right from the beginning. Find something so abhorrent that no one will defend it or want to be associated with it, then take the word for that something and apply it everywhere. This happens far too much with the word "racism", for example. Racism is abhorrent, but some arguments against mass immigration or affirmative action aren't racist -- they're just defined as racist by people who don't want to deal with them. The same has lately been happening with the word "pedophilia", which is being applied to things far beyond its actual definition.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteMustang & Dave Miller: I would agree that knowingly pressing false charges against someone should be a punishable crime. A "not guilty" verdict on those charges would not be sufficient to prove that this is what the person who pressed charges did -- obviously, since "not guilty" just means the charges were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
ReplyDeleteMaking a false accusation should be a crime like any other crime, with conviction and punishment only possible after a trial convicted the person of making false accusations by the same standard of being beyond a reasonable doubt.
Men exploiting their power to sexually abuse women has probably been going on for as long as humans have been around. What's different now is that the media and society are, in most cases, more likely to give victims a hearing and take such abuses seriously.
ReplyDeleteThe wave of cases we've seen recently will probably do more to improve behavior than most other strategies could do. Millions of men who think of sexual harassment as a kind of entertainment and no big deal, are now seeing that it can blow up into a career-ending disaster, even for men more powerful than most.
And now Matt Lauer and Garrison Keillor have both lost their jobs because of sexual inappropriateness.
ReplyDeleteIn today's climate, is everyone guilty? Or are corporations operating out of an abundance of caution so as not to be liable in the even of a future accusation?
Speaking from my experience as a now retired manager, the company I worked for for 27 yrs was very sensitive to both the issue as well as the responsibility it had to insure the work environment was non threatening. They also were keenly aware of the liability issue you mention Dave.
ReplyDeleteI fear you may be right. That, if it becomes the norm will possibly correct one injustice while creating another.
The only winners are the attorneys.
I never particularly liked Lauer. Garrison Keillor says he touched a woman's bare back and it was an accident. Keillor's statement here. If what Keillor says is true (and I AM inclined to believe him) this is getting a little ridiculous, with some innocent (or no where near as guilty) men being swept up (and fired/slandered) along with the scumbags.
ReplyDeleteJust to be clear, I think the vast majority of women who have come forward with allegations (or who will come forward) are telling the truth. Obviously the person who was working with James O'Keefe to try to discredit the other VALID Roy Moore allegations (with a fake one) was lying. And she was quickly exposed.
DeleteAs for all the other allegations, SOME of those I think are (or could) be blown out of proportion. To me, that absolutely seems to be the case with Garrison Keillor. It was an accident and he apologized immediately. I don't know what the woman said when she reported him, but I think NPR overreacted. Al Franken is a slightly more serious situation, I'd say. I don't think the women accusing him imagined he grabbed their asses. But I also do not believe he, being a senator, thought it would be a good idea to sexually harass constituents (women with power over him). He clearly needs to be more mindful of his hands. That said, I do not think he should resign. He didn't ask anyone for sex. He didn't grab any boobs. He apologized.
As for Matt Lauer, more of the story came out last night... and he is CLEARLY guilty of some pretty reprehensible acts and he absolutely should have been fired. And possibly prosecuted. From what I've heard he coerced a woman into sex. She thought she might lose her job, and I'd call that rape.
Roy Moore is guilty. And your views on feminism (IMO) do NOT "run parallel" to that other blogger's (misogynist I mentioned earlier).
Perhaps parallel is not the correct word selection, and you are correct, the blogger to which you refer and I differ on many things. The other blogger grew up in a time and place much different than my own. Our life experiences and education were very likely much different as well. Or put another way we became a product of our environment. now, enough said about that.
DeleteThe ONLY positive thing about the current hysteria over the many degrees of inappropriate behaviors we are hearing about related to power & sex is that AWARENESS is being elevated to a much higher level. Perhaps with greater awareness (and training) the prevalence of these cases will diminish significantly. They will never completely disappear and anyone who thinks they will is simply kidding themselves.
BTW, during this "process" there will be innocent men unfairly damaged, as Dave noted in a comment.
"BTW, during this 'process' there will be innocent men unfairly damaged, as Dave noted in a comment."
ReplyDeleteTrue, RN. But remember the many innocent females who were damaged because many sexual harassers, predators, and pedophiles got away with their crimes.
Which is why I completed an entire paragraph identifying the only good thing to come out of the current hysteria.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DeleteMaybe you can help me out, RN. You say you believe Roy Moore was not "abusive either sexually or otherwise". Leigh Corfman says she was 14 when Roy Moore "took off her shirt and pants and removed his clothes. He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear".
ReplyDeleteBeverly Young Nelson says that, when she was 16, Roy Moore assaulted her. Nelson claims that "I did nothing to encourage this flirtatious behavior" (Moore had shown an interest in her for awhile). This clearly was NOT a case of Moore using his "position and or station in life to influence an individual to grant favor". She accepted a ride from Moore, trusted him because he was a DA, but she was not influenced to grant him any sexual favors. Nelson says "Moore groped her and tried to force her head onto his crotch. ...she yelled and tried to leave the car, but Moore locked the door".
In both cases Moore eventually relented when the teens continued to object (and didn't give in). Does that make what Moore did not sexual assault?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete