Entertainment and #MeToo

[Scomagia]

Unless you've been living in a cave, you're probably aware of the MeToo movement. Banding together alleged victims of sexual abuse via Twitter, Me Too has been upheld as a useful tool for striking back at alleged sex offenders. However, it seems that MeToo holds the potential for capriciousness and hypocrisy. Asia Argento, one of the most prominent MeToo voices, has found herself in the crosshairs.

https://www.salon.com/2018/08/20/asia-a ... the-other/

But where there has been a furor over other alleged sex offenders, Argento has found ample voices defending her. Per the article;

Another Weinstein accuser, Rosanna Arquette, went further, saying, "Stop until you hear all the facts this a set up. I know many many rape and trauma survivors who act out sexually The wounds they carry run deep. I pray for them. the timing of this story is suspect. Asia was still raped by Harvey Weinstein." [sic]

In her defense of Argento, Arquette ocilates between suggesting the accusations are a set up and apparently justifying Argento's behavior as "acting out".
Furthermore, Argento has turned the tables on her accuser, alleging that he, in fact, sexually assaulted her. https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/cu ... nt-719405/

In another, less criminal case, Louis C.K. has been castigated for daring to....go back to work before the mob deemed it acceptable. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/28/arts ... ction.html
For those unfamiliar, Louis C.K. admitted last year to allegations that he masturbated in front of consenting fellow comedians at various times in his hotel room. Admission of guilt and 9 months of stalling his career, it seems, isn't enough punishment. The need for him to work is, apparently, not as great as the need of the mob to tell him when he should return. This leads me to....

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/mo ... story.html
Steven Wilder Striegel, a convicted sex offender, has had his scene removed from the upcoming film The Predator based not on his behavior on set but instead on the charges for which he was convicted and served time years before the scene was shot. Olivia Munn, the lead actress, was the person responsible for his firing. While Striegler hasn't been targeted by MeToo per se, the deletion of his scene occurred as a direct consequence of the Post MeToo climate.

So, to the questions. First, has MeToo devolved (or has it always been) into hypocritical mob justice? Second, is it appropriate for people to be shamed out of their livelihood, even if they only engaged in quasi-inappropriate behavior with consenting adults? Should the mob dictate under what conditions they may return? Third, should a person's previous crimes (for which they have been punished) bar them from pursuing their art and livelihood?

My thoughts: I believe MeToo is now and has always been a dangerous vessel of shaming and hypocrisy and that those who participate in it assume a degree of power over the lives and careers of others that is, frankly, unconscionable. I do not think Louis C.K. needs permission from anyone to go back to work and I find it ridiculous that anyone would assert that he does. Lastly, I don't agree with removing an already shot scene because of someone's criminal history when no allegations of impropriety came from on set. People have a right to continue their lives without the shadow of their past haunting them eternally.

[Page]

I think you are unfairly generalizing about #MeToo, which is not a centralized, organized movement but rather a banner under which people rally, and it is worth remembering what #MeToo literally meant in the first place: It was the hashtag under which people came together to speak out about being sexually assaulted or subjected to harassing and threatening behavior, to show the world how pervasive this problem is.

It seems trendy these days for critics to distort what these movements stand for with dramatic exaggeration. The point of #MeToo was to show "look, almost every one you know has been through this, this is a problem we need to address", but now there are people who think #MeToo means far-left man-hating radical feminism. The message behind Black Lives Matter is that the disproportionate killing of unarmed black people by police is a problem, but now people who have been exposed to far-right media think it means "Throw Whitey in the gas chamber." A lot of people mistakenly believe that antifa is some kind of organized terrorist group, when in reality it has no leadership or organizational structure at all, it's just a banner that small groups all over the world rally under. It's melodramatic propaganda, taking the most extreme (or perceived to be extreme) examples and using it to generalize movements that millions of people play a small part of.

Some would like to paint #MeToo as a hysterical witch hunt. Surely there are some false accusations, yes, it's despicable to slander someone by accusing them publicly of sexual misconduct which they did not actually do. The problem is the assumption that a huge number of the accusations are false, when in reality we need to face up to the fact that sexual assault and harassment is an epidemic. #MeToo opens peoples' eyes to how bad it has gotten.

[Datlofff]

#MeToo started off with noble goals but now it seems like people are using it to destroy people they just don't like, as everyone just assumes they are honest and correct and jumps on the outrage mob bandwagon.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

As with everything, although I think the movement started with good intentions, it too has devolved into a nest of hypocrisy and a tool to manipulate others at times.

Banding together to say ''yes, it happened to me, I understand and this shall not define me'' is, when done for the right reasons, a powerful and helpful thing. But when it's used to justify what some people do because it's convenient... nah, fuck that. Argento was abused sexually, and that was wrong. However, she is an abuser herself and she should face the music. The same way Weinstein should. A vagina is not a free pass.

[Internationalist Bastard]

Well it’s one of those things that was noble and took a lot of courage to step forward and do, but has since devolved into accusing people and everyone just going for it. So I think the lesson we should take is that sexual abuse is a real and rampant problem, and we need to find a balance between supporting victims and ruining people’s lives without proof

[Kvatchdom]

It's a twitter hashtag, not a bloody movement.

[USS Monitor]

#metoo has always been a mix of productive discourse and toxic mob mentality. Sexual assault is worth discussing, but the hysteria isn't helpful.

[Scomagia]

I think you are unfairly generalizing about #MeToo, which is not a centralized, organized movement but rather a banner under which people rally, and it is worth remembering what #MeToo literally meant in the first place: It was the hashtag under which people came together to speak out about being sexually assaulted or subjected to harassing and threatening behavior, to show the world how pervasive this problem is.

It seems trendy these days for critics to distort what these movements stand for with dramatic exaggeration. The point of #MeToo was to show "look, almost every one you know has been through this, this is a problem we need to address", but now there are people who think #MeToo means far-left man-hating radical feminism. The message behind Black Lives Matter is that the disproportionate killing of unarmed black people by police is a problem, but now people who have been exposed to far-right media think it means "Throw Whitey in the gas chamber." A lot of people mistakenly believe that antifa is some kind of organized terrorist group, when in reality it has no leadership or organizational structure at all, it's just a banner that small groups all over the world rally under. It's melodramatic propaganda, taking the most extreme (or perceived to be extreme) examples and using it to generalize movements that millions of people play a small part of.

Some would like to paint #MeToo as a hysterical witch hunt. Surely there are some false accusations, yes, it's despicable to slander someone by accusing them publicly of sexual misconduct which they did not actually do. The problem is the assumption that a huge number of the accusations are false, when in reality we need to face up to the fact that sexual assault and harassment is an epidemic. #MeToo opens peoples' eyes to how bad it has gotten.

The question now is, "has Me Too done more good than harm". I don't think the answer is as clear as you might think.

[Scomagia]

It's a twitter hashtag, not a bloody movement.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[Costa Fierro]

I think you are unfairly generalizing about #MeToo

How? It is, for the most part, a movement that sets out to control men.

which is not a centralized, organized movement but rather a banner under which people rally

And therein lies the problem. The lack of structure makes it chaotic and unable to achieve anything tangible.

It seems trendy these days for critics to distort what these movements stand for with dramatic exaggeration.

Not really. #MeToo never had any goals in mind other than controlling men through fear. It's working, but not in women's favour.

The point of #MeToo was to show "look, almost every one you know has been through this, this is a problem we need to address", but now there are people who think #MeToo means far-left man-hating radical feminism.

That's exactly what it is and who is promoting it. That is exactly the kind of thing that such people would promote.

Some would like to paint #MeToo as a hysterical witch hunt.

That's what it is.

Face it, it's a complete and utter farce whose public face are nothing but predatory hypocrites.

[Bombadil]

Every few years the idea that sexually inappropriate behaviour is not good thing hits the media narrative and cases come out and there's a bit of anguished handwringing and then some talking heads are all 'well what's wrong with telling a lady she's pretty, Jesus I can't open a door anymore..' and somehow that becomes the counter narrative as if opening a door is what people are complaining about rather than cases of sexual assault in particular industries.

So easy to attack these things.. take one person who's not pure as gold, call out hypocrisy and tarnish the entire idea of doing anything to stop sexual assault by pointing to an instance or two.

Having said that, ultimately I imagine people in the entertainment industry are thinking twice before they consider using the old casting couch.

[Costa Fierro]

Every few years the idea that sexually inappropriate behaviour is not good thing hits the media narrative and cases come out and there's a bit of anguished handwringing and then some talking heads are all 'well what's wrong with telling a lady she's pretty, Jesus I can't open a door anymore..' and somehow that becomes the counter narrative as if opening a door is what people are complaining about rather than cases of sexual assault in particular industries.

Except it's resulting in more than just off-the-cuff comments. To the extent that some prominent women are scared that women's gains in the workplace might be rolled back because powerful men in senior positions do not want to risk their careers and reputations by being in rooms alone with women, and that women will be seen as even more of a risk as potential employees.

[Scomagia]

Every few years the idea that sexually inappropriate behaviour is not good thing hits the media narrative and cases come out and there's a bit of anguished handwringing and then some talking heads are all 'well what's wrong with telling a lady she's pretty, Jesus I can't open a door anymore..' and somehow that becomes the counter narrative as if opening a door is what people are complaining about rather than cases of sexual assault in particular industries.

So easy to attack these things.. take one person who's not pure as gold, call out hypocrisy and tarnish the entire idea of doing anything to stop sexual assault by pointing to an instance or two.

Having said that, ultimately I imagine people in the entertainment industry are thinking twice before they consider using the old casting couch.

What tangible good has METoo accomplished? Who has been brought down (I'm talking real criminals, not the Louis C.K. types) that otherwise wouldn't have been? And what of Louis C.K.? Is it acceptable for the digital mob to dictate when a man can resume his art and livelihood?

[Bombadil]

Every few years the idea that sexually inappropriate behaviour is not good thing hits the media narrative and cases come out and there's a bit of anguished handwringing and then some talking heads are all 'well what's wrong with telling a lady she's pretty, Jesus I can't open a door anymore..' and somehow that becomes the counter narrative as if opening a door is what people are complaining about rather than cases of sexual assault in particular industries.

Except it's resulting in more than just off-the-cuff comments. To the extent that some prominent women are scared that women's gains in the workplace might be rolled back because powerful men in senior positions do not want to risk their careers and reputations by being in rooms alone with women, and that women will be seen as even more of a risk as potential employees.

Jesus..

Shall we talk about the issue of sexual abuse in the entertainment industry?
No, it might affect whether my male boss feels safe being in a meeting with me..

I mean you hear these same talking points each time, in fact John Oliver did a piece and essentially every question by the OP and your point here are shown to be trotted out every time this happens by talking heads in the media.

[Bombadil]

What tangible good has METoo accomplished? Who has been brought down (I'm talking real criminals, not the Louis C.K. types) that otherwise wouldn't have been? And what of Louis C.K.? Is it acceptable for the digital mob to dictate when a man can resume his art and livelihood?

Did they 'dictate'? I don't see anyone stopping him. Look I doubt I'll make the time or effort to do better than this in making the point so feel free to watch if you want.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHiAls8loz4

As Oliver noted, that earlier, #MeToo–esque era was catalyzed after Hill testified that Clarence Thomas, then a Supreme Court nominee, had harassed her when she worked for him at the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

“Re-watching the Senate debate about her now, it is depressing how many of the techniques used to undermine her are still around today,” Oliver said. “Concern over false allegations, blaming the victim, to outright character assassination.” Ultimately, Thomas was confirmed despite the allegations—and the #MeToo movement’s progenitor evaporated, leaving the issues it raised unresolved.

And as Anita Hill notes, improvement has happened..

Oliver’s interview with Hill herself is a fascinating retrospective—one that, if nothing else, serves as a good reminder of how fragile progress can be. Thanks to the #MeToo movement, Hill said, “There has been a tremendous amount of change in public attitude and there has been a change in the information we have about sexual harassment. Even a few years ago, people were ambivalent about what the consequences should be concerning behaving incredibly badly in the workplace.” The two spoke about Hill’s experience back in 1991, as well as various misconceptions surrounding sexual harassment—including the idea that all men should be afraid of being accused of misconduct. According to Hill, as long as they’re not harassers, they shouldn’t be scared: “If you are a harasser, then you should be terrified.”

[USS Monitor]

Some would like to paint #MeToo as a hysterical witch hunt. Surely there are some false accusations, yes, it's despicable to slander someone by accusing them publicly of sexual misconduct which they did not actually do. The problem is the assumption that a huge number of the accusations are false, when in reality we need to face up to the fact that sexual assault and harassment is an epidemic. #MeToo opens peoples' eyes to how bad it has gotten.

The problem isn't just false accusations. It's also a lack of nuance where people overreact to mildly gauche behavior.

People that get mildly handsy should not be lumped together with actual rapists.

[Hirota]

I think you are unfairly generalizing about #MeToo, which is not a centralized, organized movement but rather a banner under which people rally, and it is worth remembering what #MeToo literally meant in the first place:

Getting snotty over someone making accusations about a supposedly generalised faceless mob? You are such a hypocrite.

However, the main difference is that #metoo isn't a faceless mob. It has plenty of faces on the front of time magazine. It's just a shame that some of those faces happen to be sexual abusers themselves.

[Bombadil]

People that get mildly handsy should not be lumped together with actual rapists.

Frankly I feel it's as much about people who get mildly handsy.. it's really not that hard to not make people uncomfortable with your behaviour.. it's not asking for the world here. I don't think we need to say it's all the same but it's the toleration of everyday 'mild' stuff that is the general issue over the relatively rarer issue of worse behaviour. I mean we're all generally pretty agreed that rape is bad, although god knows there's victim blaming there.. but everyday behaviour is often excused.

I was at a company where a senior manager was a complete creep, I wouldn't work for him, 'yeah he's a bit weird', I'd hear, 'but he knows some important clients' - I'd get this from HR in talks with why I wouldn't work with him. Eventually he had to leave for sexually assaulting a colleague in a lift on a business trip.

Who saw that fucking happening.. the guy was a clear fucking creep but his everyday was excused, and I feel he was emboldened in his actions by the excuses provided for him.

Anyway, I think #metoo has generally been okay in raising the point for many people that those they know, their sisters, friends and colleagues have been through all this.

[Caracasus]

Some would like to paint #MeToo as a hysterical witch hunt. Surely there are some false accusations, yes, it's despicable to slander someone by accusing them publicly of sexual misconduct which they did not actually do. The problem is the assumption that a huge number of the accusations are false, when in reality we need to face up to the fact that sexual assault and harassment is an epidemic. #MeToo opens peoples' eyes to how bad it has gotten.

The problem isn't just false accusations. It's also a lack of nuance where people overreact to mildly gauche behavior.

People that get mildly handsy should not be lumped together with actual rapists.

Indeed, though that is a problem that has been ongoing. It is weird when a 17 year old who didn't quite wait until their 15 year old partner turned 16 is lumped into the nebulous category of 'sex offender' along with serial rapists and predatory paedophiles.

[Bombadil]

The problem isn't just false accusations. It's also a lack of nuance where people overreact to mildly gauche behavior.

People that get mildly handsy should not be lumped together with actual rapists.

Indeed, though that is a problem that has been ongoing. It is weird when a 17 year old who didn't quite wait until their 15 year old partner turned 16 is lumped into the nebulous category of 'sex offender' along with serial rapists and predatory paedophiles.

That.. I think.. is pretty different. I mean there's no clear line there between predatory and consenting in these scenarios.. say if it's a 21 year old who didn't wait.. or what about a 45 year old who didn't wait..

The thing with the law is it requires clear black and white precedence and life is just more nuanced.

[USS Monitor]

People that get mildly handsy should not be lumped together with actual rapists.

Frankly I feel it's as much about people who get mildly handsy.. it's really not that hard to not make people uncomfortable with your behaviour.. it's not asking for the world here. I don't think we need to say it's all the same but it's the toleration of everyday 'mild' stuff that is the general issue over the relatively rarer issue of worse behaviour. I mean we're all generally pretty agreed that rape is bad, although god knows there's victim blaming there.. but everyday behaviour is often excused.

I was at a company where a senior manager was a complete creep, I wouldn't work for him, 'yeah he's a bit weird', I'd hear, 'but he knows some important clients' - I'd get this from HR in talks with why I wouldn't work with him. Eventually he had to leave for sexually assaulting a colleague in a lift on a business trip.

Who saw that fucking happening.. the guy was a clear fucking creep but his everyday was excused, and I feel he was emboldened in his actions by the excuses provided for him.

Anyway, I think #metoo has generally been okay in raising the point for many people that those they know, their sisters, friends and colleagues have been through all this.

You can point out to people that they're being obnoxious without blowing it up into a giant scandal that ruins their career and continuing to demonize them even if they apologize. My biggest problem with #metoo is the people that won't accept apologies if a guy gets called out for minor bad behavior and apologizes. Throwing individual people under the bus after they apologized doesn't do anything to improve the larger societal issue.

If someone is refusing to acknowledge the problem and adjust their behavior, that's a problem. But if they apologize, and it was something low-level where misunderstandings are possible, people should accept the apology and move on.

[Caracasus]

Indeed, though that is a problem that has been ongoing. It is weird when a 17 year old who didn't quite wait until their 15 year old partner turned 16 is lumped into the nebulous category of 'sex offender' along with serial rapists and predatory paedophiles.

That.. I think.. is pretty different. I mean there's no clear line there between predatory and consenting in these scenarios.. say if it's a 21 year old who didn't wait.. or what about a 45 year old who didn't wait..

The thing with the law is it requires clear black and white precedence and life is just more nuanced.

Point is there is a lack of nuance in how such crimes are categorised, and most certainly how they are reported stemming I'd think from when such laws were drawn up - often under mistaken assumptions (for example) about motivations for many so called sex crimes.

[Scomagia]

What tangible good has METoo accomplished? Who has been brought down (I'm talking real criminals, not the Louis C.K. types) that otherwise wouldn't have been? And what of Louis C.K.? Is it acceptable for the digital mob to dictate when a man can resume his art and livelihood?

Did they 'dictate'? I don't see anyone stopping him. Look I doubt I'll make the time or effort to do better than this in making the point so feel free to watch if you want.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHiAls8loz4

As Oliver noted, that earlier, #MeToo–esque era was catalyzed after Hill testified that Clarence Thomas, then a Supreme Court nominee, had harassed her when she worked for him at the Department of Education and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

“Re-watching the Senate debate about her now, it is depressing how many of the techniques used to undermine her are still around today,” Oliver said. “Concern over false allegations, blaming the victim, to outright character assassination.” Ultimately, Thomas was confirmed despite the allegations—and the #MeToo movement’s progenitor evaporated, leaving the issues it raised unresolved.

And as Anita Hill notes, improvement has happened..

Oliver’s interview with Hill herself is a fascinating retrospective—one that, if nothing else, serves as a good reminder of how fragile progress can be. Thanks to the #MeToo movement, Hill said, “There has been a tremendous amount of change in public attitude and there has been a change in the information we have about sexual harassment. Even a few years ago, people were ambivalent about what the consequences should be concerning behaving incredibly badly in the workplace.” The two spoke about Hill’s experience back in 1991, as well as various misconceptions surrounding sexual harassment—including the idea that all men should be afraid of being accused of misconduct. According to Hill, as long as they’re not harassers, they shouldn’t be scared: “If you are a harasser, then you should be terrified.”

You know perfectly well what I meant. I do not find the likes of John Oliver to be particularly worth listening to when talking seriously about things like this, especially when the video isn't even relevant to what I am saying. It's like you're not even trying to talk me but rather some projection of a person who is just out to hate MeToo.

I reiterate; what tangible good has MeToo done? What criminals have been brought down that otherwise wouldn't have been? Is it acceptable to continue to harangue someone that broke no laws, apologized for his inappropriate behavior, and now just wants to get back to work?

[Bombadil]

Frankly I feel it's as much about people who get mildly handsy.. it's really not that hard to not make people uncomfortable with your behaviour.. it's not asking for the world here. I don't think we need to say it's all the same but it's the toleration of everyday 'mild' stuff that is the general issue over the relatively rarer issue of worse behaviour. I mean we're all generally pretty agreed that rape is bad, although god knows there's victim blaming there.. but everyday behaviour is often excused.

I was at a company where a senior manager was a complete creep, I wouldn't work for him, 'yeah he's a bit weird', I'd hear, 'but he knows some important clients' - I'd get this from HR in talks with why I wouldn't work with him. Eventually he had to leave for sexually assaulting a colleague in a lift on a business trip.

Who saw that fucking happening.. the guy was a clear fucking creep but his everyday was excused, and I feel he was emboldened in his actions by the excuses provided for him.

Anyway, I think #metoo has generally been okay in raising the point for many people that those they know, their sisters, friends and colleagues have been through all this.

You can point out to people that they're being obnoxious without blowing it up into a giant scandal that ruins their career and continuing to demonize them even if they apologize. My biggest problem with #metoo is the people that won't accept apologies if a guy gets called out for minor bad behavior and apologizes. Throwing individual people under the bus after they apologized doesn't do anything to improve the larger societal issue.

If someone is refusing to acknowledge the problem and adjust their behavior, that's a problem. But if they apologize, and it was something low-level where misunderstandings are possible, people should accept the apology and move on.

I mean.. honestly I ignore much of the media coverage around it all.. I did notice my cousin's post, my friends, a couple of colleagues and it was that more personal aspect of #metoo that I think was relatively sobering and informative.

..and I don't know.. an apology.. Louis CK was just an apology and move on? I really liked his comedy, especially his early stand up.. and I really like Pootie Tang the movie.. but I don't think 'I'm sorry' cuts it, and I'm really not bothered at all that people are saying he shouldn't be excused so quickly.

I'm not saying you're excusing CK, just using its mention in the OP to make a point. Apologies cost nothing. It's a bit like a client the other day who apologised for not having paid yet, 'apologies don't feed my family', I lightly retorted, 'pay the invoice'.

[Scomagia]

You can point out to people that they're being obnoxious without blowing it up into a giant scandal that ruins their career and continuing to demonize them even if they apologize. My biggest problem with #metoo is the people that won't accept apologies if a guy gets called out for minor bad behavior and apologizes. Throwing individual people under the bus after they apologized doesn't do anything to improve the larger societal issue.

If someone is refusing to acknowledge the problem and adjust their behavior, that's a problem. But if they apologize, and it was something low-level where misunderstandings are possible, people should accept the apology and move on.

I mean.. honestly I ignore much of the media coverage around it all.. I did notice my cousin's post, my friends, a couple of colleagues and it was that more personal aspect of #metoo that I think was relatively sobering and informative.

..and I don't know.. an apology.. Louis CK was just an apology and move on? I really liked his comedy, especially his early stand up.. and I really like Pootie Tang the movie.. but I don't think 'I'm sorry' cuts it, and I'm really not bothered at all that people are saying he shouldn't be excused so quickly.

I'm not saying you're excusing CK, just using its mention in the OP to make a point. Apologies cost nothing. It's a bit like a client the other day who apologised for not having paid yet, 'apologies don't feed my family', I lightly retorted, 'pay the invoice'.

If an apology isn't enough then what should he do? Let's remember that his big sin was masturbating in front of consenting fellow comedians, not subordinates.