#MeToo Becomes #LeaveMeAlone

[Liriena]

We get it: your gender politics are fueled by fragility and resentment.

Also, nothing inherently sickening about memes based on righteous schadenfreude, specially if it comes into being as a response by a marginalized group to the insecurities of a more powerful group.

Nah, more like there's a large grey area between non-bigotry and what's unequivocally bigoted and unjust when it comes to irony, memery and power relations between groups.

I haven't been a fan of everything (or even most things) New Mivango has said on the matter, but these comments aren't much better.

This "group vs group" talk is a bigot dogwhistle, no matter who it's coming from or aimed at. Men aren't allowed to have fears or insecurities because some men are scumbags? Are you completely incapable of viewing people as individuals? Yet you dare to make accusations about "gender politics fueled by resentment"? You're just being a hypocrite at this point.

I'd be happy to elaborate on my thoughts to dispell any notion that I'm trying to justify bigotry.

[South Ccanda]

Because they used the #MeToo movement to accuse an innocent man of rape just because they don't agree with him. now, although, its all alleged, there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims.

So do you have evidence that the claim was knowingly false and maliciously made? Or do only the men get to be innocent until proven guilty?

"there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims."

[Liriena]

So do you have evidence that the claim was knowingly false and maliciously made? Or do only the men get to be innocent until proven guilty?

"there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims."

So you are knowingly bullshitting?

[Greater vakolicci haven]

Don't quite buy that honestly. I'd fight it even if I knew I was guilty, and not just of crimes of this sort.

To be fair, many of the indubitably guilty scumbags did try to fight it. Weinsten abused his power however he could to escape responsibility.

Hard to blame anyone for fighting against it, it ruins lives. Their are less high-profile people (vox keeps a handy list) who have been fired, or who are freelancers who've found that their work has somehow all dried up though. James Lavine, one of the best operatic conductors of the modern era, is a good example (the accusers are male in this case.)

[Dooom35796821595]

Because they used the #MeToo movement to accuse an innocent man of rape just because they don't agree with him. now, although, its all alleged, there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims.

So do you have evidence that the claim was knowingly false and maliciously made? Or do only the men get to be innocent until proven guilty?

Well, he was cleared of the charges, so that implies the claim was indeed false. And considering the timing it was certainly malicious.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

"there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims."

So you are knowingly bullshitting?

An unfounded claim of false reporting is just as unfounded as an unfounded claim of sexual assault.

[His Excellence]

I'd be happy to elaborate on my thoughts to dispell any notion that I'm trying to justify bigotry.

I'd be glad to stick around if I didn't have to go to work soon, but based on your post regarding male tears, I'll concede that your stance is less one sided than those other posts had led me to believe.

[Galloism]

When I hear, "believeallwomen," it translates in my mind to "presume guilt until innocence is proven," which is the inverse of due process and the most basic principle of Western jurisprudence, that of a fair trial.

When I hear "The Future is Female," it translates to an imposed matriarchal order that reduces men to second-class citizens.

Frankly, I think that society should become more meritocratic, with gender completely immaterial to advancement, and that can never happen while the radical wing of the feminist movement dominates both feminism itself and the conversation. The moderate wing needs to assert itself and take that movement over again, before there's a civil war in the West and it becomes a bloodbath. Especially since it would be naive to think that there would be any real winners. No matter which side won, we'd all lose when law and order completely broke down, and that will happen. It not merely might happen, but it will happen, if the radical wing of feminism continues to hold sway. They'll have blood on their hands, men's, women's, and children's.

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

"Believe Donald Trump".

[Parhe]

I don't see this is misogynistic towards all women. I'll use an example. I know several people in RL, most of them female, who will cross the street at night to avoid a young black men, or group of, further down the street. Now, racism aside, and I do consider it a bit racist, none of them, as far as I am aware, think all or most young black men are dangeros, but why risk coming across that 0.1%?

...umm, yeah, actually. there IS an underlying assumption in that example that young black men are inherently dangerous. That's not "a bit racist". It's 100% racist.

Yes, it is racist. But point is that there is not assumption that all young black men are inherently dangerous, or some men, as some friends of mine avoid all men on the streets at night.

[Dekerin Domains]

There is a difference between having an opinion that someone is guilty and actually urging that they be punished without a trial.

For instance, I believe that OJ Simpson, Woody Allen, and Donald Trump are all guilty of the acts of which they have been accused. I do not believe the charges against Michael Jackson, Al Franken, or Bill and Hillary Clinton. Yet I must acknowledge, in the name of fairness, that Allen has never been formally charged with the molestation of Dylan Farrow, that OJ Simpson was acquitted by a jury of his peers, and that Donald Trump has yet to be formally indicted for anything.

On the other hand, Mike Tyson was duly, and I believe rightfully, convicted of the rape of Desiree Washington. He served his time. He paid his debt to society. Yet the conviction stands as part of the public record and he remains, quite fairly, I might add, a convicted felon. It does reinforce the impression that he was probably guilty of abusing Robin Givens, too, but there is no way to say that with confidence. I can't flat-out claim that he's a wifebeater, but I can confidently, and accurately declare that he's a convicted rapist. The same with Bill Cosby, with Dennis Hastert (convicted child molester), with Stephen Collins (Reverend Camden from Seventh Heaven), and with Jared Fogle from Subway ads.

It's also fair to point that Donald Trump, who now wants to be presumed innocent of his charges, took out and paid for public print ads calling for the lynching of the Central Park Five, who have been since cleared of all wrongdoing. That's a definite travesty of justice and a breach of the presumption of innocence. He still won't, to this day, admit that he was wrong about it, either. That's a far cry from voting not to confirm Brett Kavanaugh due to reservations about possible sexual harassment.

[Scomagia]

#MeToo's original purpose wasn't extremist. I never said that. But "believe women" runs antithetical to every precept of modern, Western, constitutional law, to due process, both substantive and procedural. And the way that "male tears" was popularized and condoned by even the moderates is truly sickening.

It should never be socially acceptable to be that callous as to think that "drowning" in anyone's tears, male or female, black or white, gay or straight or bi, is somehow cool.

"Believe women" was not an attack on "Western" values. If anything, it was an attack on something that was and still is fundamentally broken about "Western" values, which is a widespread institutional reluctance to fully investigate sexual violence.

Also, nothing inherently sickening about memes based on righteous schadenfreude, specially if it comes into being as a response by a marginalized group to the insecurities of a more powerful group.

Believe all women has some pretty obvious connotations. It suggests attributing truth value to a woman's claims before investigating and until her account is disproven. That is somewhat anti-western, since you're arbitrarily deciding that what a person says is true because of their sex. That's bad. Instead of "believe all women" it ought to be something more like "investigate all accusations".

There is something very sickening about an individual grouping others together and then mocking them. It's just as sickening as the arbitrary and hostile way you grouped me earlier in this thread because you didn't agree with what I was saying. Instead of treating me like an individual, you lumped me into a group and attacked that group. It's wrong and it shouldn't be done. Deal with people as individuals, not as members of an "oppressor" or "oppressed" group. There's absolutely nothing righteous about playing the group hate, group responsibility game.

[Dekerin Domains]

"Believe women" was not an attack on "Western" values. If anything, it was an attack on something that was and still is fundamentally broken about "Western" values, which is a widespread institutional reluctance to fully investigate sexual violence.

Also, nothing inherently sickening about memes based on righteous schadenfreude, specially if it comes into being as a response by a marginalized group to the insecurities of a more powerful group.

Believe all women has some pretty obvious connotations. It suggests attributing truth value to a woman's claims before investigating and until her account is disproven. That is somewhat anti-western, since you're arbitrarily deciding that what a person says is true because of their sex. That's bad. Instead of "believe all women" it ought to be something more like "investigate all accusations".

There is something very sickening about an individual grouping others together and then mocking them. It's just as sickening as the arbitrary and hostile way you grouped me earlier in this thread because you didn't agree with what I was saying. Instead of treating me like an individual, you lumped me into a group and attacked that group. It's wrong and it shouldn't be done. Deal with people as individuals, not as members of an "oppressor" or "oppressed" group. There's absolutely nothing righteous about playing the group hate, group responsibility game.

Yeah, I'm a fairly left of center guy, but I've never been comfortable with the whole "lumping people together with group guilt" business of identity politics. Not once, not ever.

[Zurkerx]

PC outrage uses a real problem to cloak itself as the solution, but then goes overboard and goes after everyone they deem as an "oppressor" instead of simply going after the guilty.

Welcome to the 21st Century, my friend.

But yeah, the #MeToo Movement started off good, but has since been hijacked.

[Scomagia]

Believe all women has some pretty obvious connotations. It suggests attributing truth value to a woman's claims before investigating and until her account is disproven. That is somewhat anti-western, since you're arbitrarily deciding that what a person says is true because of their sex. That's bad. Instead of "believe all women" it ought to be something more like "investigate all accusations".

There is something very sickening about an individual grouping others together and then mocking them. It's just as sickening as the arbitrary and hostile way you grouped me earlier in this thread because you didn't agree with what I was saying. Instead of treating me like an individual, you lumped me into a group and attacked that group. It's wrong and it shouldn't be done. Deal with people as individuals, not as members of an "oppressor" or "oppressed" group. There's absolutely nothing righteous about playing the group hate, group responsibility game.

Yeah, I'm a fairly left of center guy, but I've never been comfortable with the whole "lumping people together with group guilt" business of identity politics. Not once, not ever.

Same here. It's a practice I find revoltng. If you have an issue with what I say, take issue as an individual against another individual's opinions, not as a member of "Group A" vs. "Group B".

This is the basis of racism and sexism. You as an individual don't matter, it's your group affiliation that matters. It's absolute garbage. Liriena needs to cut this shit out if they want to be taken seriously. It isn't virtuous to treat people this way. It's wrong and disgusting.

[Costa Fierro]

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

[Liriena]

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

Believe Terry Crews.

[South Ccanda]

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

Believe Terry Crews.

wait, what'd he do?

[Vassenor]

Pretty sure "believe women" just means "don't dismiss accusations out of hand and actually investigate them". But I get that that doesn't really gel with this idea that feminism wants to take over the world.

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

I have never actually seen anyone demand someone be treated as guilty until proven innocent. At least until someone starts claiming they made the accusation maliciously.

[Costa Fierro]

I have never actually seen anyone demand someone be treated as guilty until proven innocent. At least until someone starts claiming they made the accusation maliciously.

Because you've happily elected to stick your head in the ground and ignore anything that might portray modern feminism or #MeToo in a negative light.

[Galloism]

Believe Terry Crews.

wait, what'd he do?

>immediately assume the black guy did something bad

Good job, nationstates.

[Vassenor]

I have never actually seen anyone demand someone be treated as guilty until proven innocent. At least until someone starts claiming they made the accusation maliciously.

Because you've happily elected to stick your head in the ground and ignore anything that might portray modern feminism or #MeToo in a negative light.

As opposed to sticking your head in the ground and ignoring anything that might portray modern feminism or #MeToo in a positive light. Or anything that would paint the Men's Rights movement in a negative one.

And you know, rather than sniping you could actually try providing examples of that happening.

[Kaggeceria]

Stop using sexual assault accusations as weapons against men.

An accusation, even if it has no evidence, is enough to destroy a man's career and reputation. Wanting to avoid having that happen is fairly sensible. Its not misogynistic.

So your solution to male paranoia is silencing accusers.in general. Gotcha.

You must have a big shovel.

[Galloism]

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

I have never actually seen anyone demand someone be treated as guilty until proven innocent. At least until someone starts claiming they made the accusation maliciously.

You know, all words are symbols.

[Kaggeceria]

No, believe women is exactly what it says. Believe women when they make any kinds of allegations against men. If anyone doubts a woman's allegations, then they have chosen the side of the oppressor.

I have never actually seen anyone demand someone be treated as guilty until proven innocent. At least until someone starts claiming they made the accusation maliciously.

If you #BelieveWomen then you are already electing to believe the accusations a woman makes regardless of truthfulness or evidence and treat the man as guilty.

[Kaggeceria]

"there is no more basis behind my claims than their claims."

So you are knowingly bullshitting?

Are you actually going to do anything in this thread besides pathetically sniping at people?

Perhaps this is part of your fragility.