#MeToo Becomes #LeaveMeAlone

[Costa Fierro]

Avoiding woman beacuse of a possible twitter backlash is stupid.

It's more than that. Way, way more than that.

But now all the poor oppressed white men don't have to fear having their lives ruined when their sexual activities come back to bite them.

It's not white men. It's all men, regardless of ethnicity. This "poor, oppressed white men" mockery doesn't even fit the reality where men who have been brought down by allegations (some more legitimate than others). Look at Anziz Ansari. For the want of a better example, look at Bill Cosby. The former is an Indian-American whose reputation was slandered because he went on a bad date with a woman, and the other one was an African-American who (perhaps rightly) went to jail for sexual abuse. Neither of them fit the narrative that you apparently are trying to mock.

What's also interesting to note is that you refer to this as having "sexual activities come back to bite them" looks awfully like the kind of statement someone would make if they were slut shaming women. Just pointing that out.

[Holy Tedalonia]

Bunch of bourgeois men learning the wrong lesson from #MeToo. How shocking.

I think caution is the right lesson. Not playing with fire is using caution. They are merely acting logically. Now, whether that’s a morally good thing or a bad thing, is to be decided.

[Valrifell]

Bunch of bourgeois men learning the wrong lesson from #MeToo. How shocking.

I think caution is the right lesson. Not playing with fire is using caution. They are merely acting logically. Now, whether that’s a morally good thing or a bad thing, is to be decided.

This logic comes with the fundamental assumption that a very significant portion of women in business would make a false sexual harassment claim.

This is a premise that I can not get behind, anything following from this premise should be treated as irrational.

[Costa Fierro]

The problem with #MeToo? Apparently not women getting raped, but the poor men who apparently have something to fear.

So people having their lives ruined or being sent to prison on false accusations doesn't strike you as being particularly troubling?

We don't do this with anything else.

Because we don't treat this like anything else. If someone said "oh he murdered someone", we would all be demanding evidence. If someone said "oh, he sexually assaulted someone", we nod our heads in agreement and start climbing over one another to say "I believe you". We do this because we accept the narrative of men being perpetrators of sexual crimes and women being victims (this also happens with domestic violence, but that is for another time). And now with #MeToo pushing the whole "Listen and Believe", suddenly men in the workplace have found themselves in the firing sights of any woman that wants to engage in this behaviour.

In reality, the number of false accusations is far, far, far outstripped by the number of real acquisitions.

That's not true at all, because we lack reliable statistics that definitively prove how many cases are legitimate and how many are not.

#MeToo is practically just women coming forward with their stories, nothing more.

That is simplistic to the point of ignorance.

[Holy Tedalonia]

I think caution is the right lesson. Not playing with fire is using caution. They are merely acting logically. Now, whether that’s a morally good thing or a bad thing, is to be decided.

This logic comes with the fundamental assumption that a very significant portion of women in business would make a false sexual harassment claim.

This is a premise that I can not get behind, anything following from this premise should be treated as irrational.

Honestly using caution is better than doing something you regret. It doesn’t take a large portion of women to get one accusation. It’s like insurance, something will likely not happen, but if something does come up than your safe.

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

Oh, is this just more about how Pence won't go anywhere without mummy in case one of the mean women claims he raped her?

I may be wrong, but I believe that Pence's wife supports the measure, which begs the question, who are you to mock it? If they both feel more comfortable that way, God bless 'em.

[The Black Forrest]

That is simplistic to the point of ignorance.

Eh? Is it about getting at the incels?

Before it started; bringing down Weinstein would have been a laugh at the suggestion. #metoo has it's problems....it's still a step forward.

[Vassenor]

Oh, is this just more about how Pence won't go anywhere without mummy in case one of the mean women claims he raped her?

I may be wrong, but I believe that Pence's wife supports the measure, which begs the question, who are you to mock it? If they both feel more comfortable that way, God bless 'em.

Because fucking over half the population to save the fee fees of two people is something I am not allowed to criticise?

[Costa Fierro]

This logic comes with the fundamental assumption that a very significant portion of women in business would make a false sexual harassment claim.

No it doesn't. The logic is that there is the potential for women to make false allegations, but no one is sure who. So the question is whether or not is it worth risking it?

This is a premise that I can not get behind, anything following from this premise should be treated as irrational.

It's not irrational to examine the risks and take action to avoid those risks. "Gender segregation" isn't happening quite yet, and while it may be the nuclear option, it is nevertheless a reaction to something with which men have absolutely no control of.

It's not that all women are going to make false accusations, it's acknowledging that there is potential for false accusations (and these don't even have to be sexual in nature) to be made.

[The National Salvation Front for Russia]

Because fucking over half the population to save the fee fees of two people is something I am not allowed to criticise?

You don't need to mock Pence to criticise the stupid gender segregation carried out by some Wall Street financiers?

[New haven america]

The problem with #MeToo? Apparently not women getting raped, but the poor men who apparently have something to fear.

So people having their lives ruined or being sent to prison on false accusations doesn't strike you as being particularly troubling?

Yes, poor Matt Lauer, who over the course of 20 years harassed and raped women at NBC (With an office that could literally trap people in it) with no consequence. Or good ol' Harvey, who used the fear of blackballing careers to get sexual favors, perform harassment, and rape women with little to no consequence. I could go on... Boo-fucking-hoo, I weep for them.

Also, you seem to be missing something. Aziz Ansari may have been accused of misconduct, but once the story came out and the events pieced together (Which took less than a day), no one believed he did anything wrong. He got off scot-free, as he should because he did nothing wrong.

[Costa Fierro]

Eh? Is it about getting at the incels?

It has nothing to do with incels.

Before it started; bringing down Weinstein would have been a laugh at the suggestion. #metoo has it's problems....it's still a step forward.

I'm not saying it isn't a step forward, I'm asking whether or not the results are worth the means. Ergo, is #MeToo worth sacrificing the progress women have made in the workplace?

[New haven america]

We get it Costa, women are evil harpies who exist solely to ruin men's lives and we should just exterminate them all so men can live peacefully.

For the 8,000th time, we get it.

MGTOWs never seem to actually go their own way. Instead they always linger and whine about how much the entire female gender sucks.

They'll go their own way eventually.

Someday, maybe, hopefully...

[The Blaatschapen]

MGTOWs never seem to actually go their own way. Instead they always linger and whine about how much the entire female gender sucks.

They'll go their own way eventually.

Someday, maybe, hopefully...

You can go your own way!
Go your own way
You can call it another lonely day

[Valrifell]

This logic comes with the fundamental assumption that a very significant portion of women in business would make a false sexual harassment claim.

No it doesn't. The logic is that there is the potential for women to make false allegations, but no one is sure who. So the question is whether or not is it worth risking it?

Women make up half the population on the planet (slightly more or slightly less depending on where you find yourself) and there have only been a handful of false accusations that have ruined people. The bulk have never been conclusively proven and most have been high-profile, however, so the rational thing to think is "oh, this is a non-issue because I'm not famous in the same way those other guys were, plus these are a minority of a minority of women, I'm sure I've nothing to fear"

Therefore, the logical conclusion would be to either do nothing or maybe make sure you don't give these women an opening to attack you. Obvious exception, of course, is that you do have something to fear if guilty. But I don't see most of these men as guilty, just not thinking.

This is a premise that I can not get behind, anything following from this premise should be treated as irrational.

It's not irrational to examine the risks and take action to avoid those risks. "Gender segregation" isn't happening quite yet, and while it may be the nuclear option, it is nevertheless a reaction to something with which men have absolutely no control of.

It's not that all women are going to make false accusations, it's acknowledging that there is potential for false accusations (and these don't even have to be sexual in nature) to be made.

The potential is so small as to be negligible, for the reasons outlined above and for the sheer numbers game of it all. It's almost as if these people are suffering from a twisted version of survivorship bias, where the most high-profile claims are the ones with the least-conclusive evidence (with Bill Cosby as an exception) and the most far-reaching consequences.

[LiberNovusAmericae]

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.

[Saiwania]

I can understand why some men would want to preempt any conflicts with Feminism to protect their current status and reputation, but the solution in my view isn't to hate women in general for existing or for being corrupted by a toxic media upbringing that feeds them the poison of Feminism from an early age. I don't have all the answers but I lean towards favoring gender segregation and more outside supervision in contexts where both genders work together on projects.

If a woman needs to be hired, an HR woman should be used to preempt any accusation of bias. If a man needs to be hired, an HR man should be used. If a woman has a good rapport with male colleagues and she has no history of Feminazi activism or activities, then men could perhaps trust her enough to let her into their world.

[Vince Vaughn]

I work in investment banking. This is largely true. After what happened to Kavanaugh, everyone's been on edge.

[Xenophone]

#MeToo has good intentions, but falls short of anything... meaningful
#MeToo has only been making things worse

[Valrifell]

I work in investment banking. This is largely true. After what happened to Kavanaugh, everyone's been on edge.

It doesn't surprise me, tbh.

The sort that Kav has been painted as strike me as the type who go into finance.

[Vassenor]

So how many actual cases of people actually having their lives actually ruined by actual false accusations of sexual assault are there?

[Galloism]

So how many actual cases of people actually having their lives actually ruined by actual false accusations of sexual assault are there?

This guy would like a word.

[Vince Vaughn]

I work in investment banking. This is largely true. After what happened to Kavanaugh, everyone's been on edge.

It doesn't surprise me, tbh.

The sort that Kav has been painted as strike me as the type who go into finance.

One of the analysts at the office hooked up with a girl during it and straight up asked her in one of those "I sound like I'm joking but I'm really not" tones if she was going to accuse him of impropriety 37 years down the line. People joke a lot less at work (or at least wait until the ladies leave).

The sort that Kav has been painted as strike me as the type who go into finance.

Kav is an attorney. I resent that.

[Parcia]

I Can relate to this.

[Liriena]

So how many actual cases of people actually having their lives actually ruined by actual false accusations of sexual assault are there?

This guy would like a word.

Vass asked for quantity.