Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:26 am UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:The people who are most bloodthirsty about the vigilante justice of social media crucifixions based on rumored accusations (and about the vigilante justice of, ahem, punching Nazis) are, I suspect, themselves Trump-style sociopaths and toadies. Think about it. They get a power rush from doing or advocating things that transgress the usual social standards against vigilante violence, and they play to a crowd of likeminded toadies happy to cheer them on and say that the usual social standards don't apply in this case. Isn't this just what Trump and his ilk are also doing?

We have to be careful not to become the thing we're battling.

I sometimes feel pretty bloodthirsty to convict unapologetic rapists. Does that mean I am a, "Trump-style sociopath?" Overall though I think you've got some good ideas for how sexual misconduct cases go down. In a lot of cases I find that rapists are high school style bullies with toadies that follow them around based on their powers and charisma. So they receive support from wider society, their toadies and anyone shocked and awed enough by their bad behavior to wanna... cozy up to them for business or whatever, which is another factor? Anyways, with such powerful peoples, I doubt social media bandwagons accusing them of being sexual abusers actually matters? To someone famous even a few thousand peoples thinking badly of them ain't gonna ping their radar at all, they may even never notice that the regular peeps have noticed their bad behaviors?

I've found sociopaths with fame and monies just ignore when they get in trouble and keep on doing it 'cause they got the social means, and financial powers, to keep themselves afloat despite damaging accusations.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10130
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby CorruptUser » Sun Feb 11, 2018 4:42 am UTC

Ginger wrote:I sometimes feel pretty bloodthirsty to convict unapologetic rapists. Does that mean I am a, "Trump-style sociopath?"


Eh, no, it's different because you have personal experience in the matter, the Trump sociopaths have not. E.g., "my apartment was burgled! I hate all burglars and hope they die!" vs "don't you know that black people 'thugs' cause crime? We should kill all the 'thugs' and get tough on crime!"

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Sun Feb 11, 2018 5:06 am UTC

True that. I suppose reactionary judging of "criminals and other races" that Trump sociopaths do is... not bred out of experience but malice. If Trump style sociopaths, whom are currently running our USA in my opinions, had Personal Experiences on these things they may not be so hasty to continue such a violent, costly, unmerciful wars on crimes? Maybe maybe?
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
Sableagle
Ormurinn's Alt
Posts: 1863
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 4:26 pm UTC
Location: The wrong side of the mirror
Contact:

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Sableagle » Sun Feb 11, 2018 9:45 am UTC

While I remember to ask, how come this thread shows up in "new posts" but not in "your posts" for me? It's kind of weird.

Ginger wrote:In a lot of cases I find that rapists are high school style bullies with toadies that follow them around based on their powers and charisma. So they receive support from wider society, their toadies and anyone shocked and awed enough by their bad behavior to wanna... cozy up to them for business or whatever, which is another factor?


Like this guy, you mean?
However, the media, and the judicial system, are treating him as though he deserves special privilege. Why? Because he is an attractive, young, white male who is a talented swimmer. However, although he seemed to have a lot of promise, this does not change the fact that he is a rapist. He has officially been found guilty of rape, and yet, our media and judicial system are giving him a slap on the wrist in order to protect him.

The "All-American" swimmer was sentenced to six months in jail, instead of the maximum fourteen years, due to the judge fearing that jail would have a "severe impact" on Turner. Turner, however, deserves the "severe impact" that jail will have on him. His actions had him arrested, facing fourteen years in prison, and yet he was given six months. What will he learn from this?


In looking for that one, I saw several reports of careers ruined by false accusations, people afraid to leave the house due to shame after false accusations and so on. I guess whether being accused of rape bothers a man depends more on what sort of person he is than on whether he's guilty ...

... and the guilty ones may be less likely to be bothered. How's that for a messed-up world?

Oh, look. Another one.
One way to report on the outcome of a rape trial is to discuss the legal ramifications of the decision or the effect the proceedings may have on the life of the victim. Another angle reporters can take is to publicly worry about the "promising future" of the convicted rapists, now less promising as a direct result of their choice to rape someone.

Reporters at CNN today chose the latter technique. General correspondent Poppy Harlow, speaking to anchor Candy Crowley, had this to say about the verdict:

"Incredibly difficult, even for an outsider like me, to watch what happened as these two young men that had such promising futures, star football players, very good students, literally watched as they believed their lives fell apart...when that sentence came down, [Ma'lik] collapsed in the arms of his attorney...He said to him, 'My life is over. No one is going to want me now.' Very serious crime here, both found guilty of raping the sixteen-year-old girl at a series of parties back in August."

CNN also played footage of both convicted rapists tearfully apologizing in court. Harlow went on to describe in detail an emotional exchange between Ma'lik Richmond, one of the defendants, and his estranged father.

Candy asked Paul Callan, a legal expert, to elaborate on the future of the two young men, stressing their youth and emotional vulnerability.

"Sixteen-year-olds just sobbing in court, regardless of what big football players they are, they still sound like sixteen-year-olds...what's the lasting effect, though, on two young men being found guilty in juvenile court of rape, essentially?"

"The most severe thing with these young men is being labeled as registered sex offenders. That label is now placed on them by Ohio law...That will haunt them for the rest of their lives. Employers, when looking up their background, will see that they're registered sex offenders. When they move into a new neighborhood and somebody goes on the Internet, where these things are posted, neighbors will know that they are registered sex offenders."

Yes, that is how the sex offender registry works. People who commit acts of sexual violence (rape, for example) and are convicted in a court of law are required to register with the national sex offender public registry, so that future employers and neighbors might do things like check said registry.

For readers interested in learning more about how not to be labeled as registered sex offenders, a good first step is not to rape unconscious women, no matter how good your grades are.
Oh, Willie McBride, it was all done in vain.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Mon Feb 12, 2018 1:05 am UTC

Yeah, talented white male athletes can get away with rape, it's true. Because they have such promising all star futures in like, swimming and football, so they Deserve to have sexes with the women and girls of their choosing. It's so, so simple everyone: Reporters should worry about whether or not a woman or girl's accusations ruin a man's life rather than whether or not he actually rapes her. In fact it seems to me that even homeless men with no promising futures ahead of them except in jails and prisons still get treated better than some classes of peoples... services workers like me for example... because the mostly male police and judicial systems would rather gloss over their brothers', fathers', uncles, or whatever mistakes rather than actually bring them to justice. It's a sad state of affairs where just doing good in school and being an athlete should render a man incapable of having raped women or girls... because we're worried about his future.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Feb 12, 2018 1:30 am UTC

Sableagle wrote:I don't want to be Captain America and punch them all out one by one. I just want to see that someone did this, ideally without hitting any journalists.

Yes, my game nights are worth more to me than the lives of 500 wannabe Amon Goeths. If that's sociopathic, I'm a sociopath.


For the record, I don't think it's sociopathic to feel extremely angry about the recent resurgence of neo-Nazism, or about the prevalence of non-consensual sexual behavior in society.

(In fact, I think there's something wrong with anyone who isn't extremely angry about these things.)

I also don't think it's sociopathic to express that anger in violent terms, such as saying "I'd like to punch those people in the face, or would like to have the schadenfreude of seeing them punched in the face."

That's not sociopathic. That's just human. Violence is an integral part of who we are. After all, even pacifists habitually use the word "fight" as a metaphor to characterize opposition to things.

But when the violent metaphors seem to be becoming more than metaphors--such as literally encouraging people to throw the first punch at anyone insecure and disturbed enough to think the Nazis were the good guys...or literally saying that the guilt or innocence of those accused of sexual harassment is irrelevant, because someone--it doesn't matter who--must pay for the sexual victimization of vulnerable people...well, that's when we're wandering from justifiable outrage into unhealthier mental territory. (In my un-medical opinion, anyway.)

Spoiler:
Sort of a side issue, but while I'm on the topic of becoming what we're opposing:

I'm frustrated that, after three tries, I've finally had to give up on going to local marches to protest Trump's hatred and indecency. All three times, I've left early and in disgust, because so many numbers of protesters around me have been either chanting or waving slogans of sexual violence like "Fuck Trump." Just as we can't fight fire with fire, we can't fight hatred, indecency, and rape culture with hatred, indecency, and rape culture. We just can't.

We've gotta stay on message, and promote actions that all of those opposed to indecency can unite behind. And a lot of people in my demographic are NOT going to be comfortable uniting behind "Fuck Trump," or "Punch Nazis," or "Immediately Tar and Feather Everyone Accused of Sexual Harassment." We are, however, doing a lot of other politically active things.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Mon Feb 12, 2018 1:39 am UTC

Sometimes however? Rape culture is the only thing people soaked in rape culture understand. They only understand when you say 'fuck you' or 'I hope you get raped' and that's the only thing that will make them change their behavior. I've gone undercover into men's circles before, as a sympathetic shoulder for them to cry on, and I've got my fair share of derogatory views about women. Everything from, 'Men can take care of kids better so we don't need wives except as fuck toys,' to, 'Women are literally by biology weaker and dumber than men and deserve to serve us only.' And I've found that being really, really mean to them on their own terms actually seems to work? Who Knew? That doesn't mean you actually wanna rape Trump or whatever... it's just colorful adjectives to make dumb apes listen to your femme sub voices or whatevers.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Feb 12, 2018 5:52 am UTC

I don't know. I still have grave doubts that insulting and threatening people is the best way to teach them to be respectful of others' dignity. That seems as hypocritical as trying to teach kids that hitting is wrong, by spanking them.

Being the recipient of bad treatment may teach some people empathy for the recipients of bad treatment, and may therefore make them less likely to treat others badly; however, for many people, the experience just seems to reinforce the idea that being able to get away with treating others badly is the true measure of power.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:07 am UTC

Well, one last note on that, and then I get off my soap box: I have tried being nice to chronic, unapologetic MRAs. The virulent, violent, nasty kinds that actually seems to think 'liberal feminazis are trying to take over the USA, feminize schools and boys, blah-blah.' And... being nice to them doesn't make them stop either. So if being mean and being nice don't work on those MRAs then how does a girl get them to stop whispering venomous words at her praytell ObsessoMom?
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:32 am UTC

Ginger wrote:So if being mean and being nice don't work on those MRAs then how does a girl get them to stop whispering venomous words at her praytell ObsessoMom?


Spend hours composing the perfect, most well-reasoned reply, to convince them of the error of their ways forever?

Nah. Even the perfect reply will be wasted on certain people.

Maybe something like a sarcastic "Wow, I'm shocked that women fail to appreciate your obvious charms" will convey your disapproval, without giving the trolls the satisfaction of a big reaction when they yank your chain.

User avatar
Ginger
Posts: 1029
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:00 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Ginger » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:33 am UTC

Thanks for the well reasonable reply and I shall read your link at once. Thank you so much ObsessoMom. LOL yes that comic strip is on topic zinger perfect. <3 it forever and ever.
Amy Lee wrote:Just what we all need... more lies about a world that never was and never will be.


Azula to Long Feng wrote:Don't flatter yourself, you were never even a player.

User avatar
ObsessoMom
Nespresso Bomb
Posts: 736
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 5:28 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ObsessoMom » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:01 am UTC

Speaking of the Brock Turner case, here's a recent development. (Caution--the link is to an article in the Los Angeles Times, which has very annoying pop-up ads.)

Judge who sentenced Stanford swimmer to six months in jail for sexual assault faces recall vote
Spoiler:
The Santa Clara County judge who sentenced a former Stanford University swimmer to six months in jail for sexually assaulting a woman after a fraternity party will be up for a recall vote later this year, the Registrar of Voters announced on Tuesday.

Though only a fraction of the 94,539 signatures submitted in a recall petition on Jan. 11 were counted, officials found more than enough for the measure to qualify Judge Aaron Persky's recall for a countywide vote, officials said.

[...]

Santa Clara County has about 800,000 registered voters.


After Persky's controversial ruling, lawmakers passed legislation in California last year that expanded the definition of rape and increased penalties for offenders who assault unconscious victims.

After the recall signature-gathering campaign launched, Persky filed a statement with the county saying that it's his job to consider lighter sentences for first offenders and that he cannot allow public opinion to factor into his decisions.

"California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders," Persky wrote in the statement.

The statement makes no direct reference to Brock Turner. It cited a review of Persky's rulings by the Associated Press that found that he followed the recommendations of the parole board in every similar case, suggesting that Turner did not receive special treatment for his status as a white collegiate athlete, as many critics have suggested.

"As a judge, my role is to consider both sides," Persky said in the statement. "It's not always popular, but it's the law and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor."

The Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors has 14 days from its Feb. 6 meeting to determine when a recall vote should take place. The Registrar of Voters is recommending the vote be placed on the statewide primary election ballot on June 5.

User avatar
orthogon
Posts: 2955
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 7:52 am UTC
Location: The Airy 1830 ellipsoid

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby orthogon » Mon Feb 12, 2018 1:57 pm UTC

ObsessoMom wrote:...or literally saying that the guilt or innocence of those accused of sexual harassment is irrelevant, because someone--it doesn't matter who--must pay for the sexual victimization of vulnerable people...well, that's when we're wandering from justifiable outrage into unhealthier mental territory. (In my un-medical opinion, anyway.)


So much this. Over the last few months, I've been surprised to see people on here, most recently I think Jose, being on the receiving end of critical posts for expressing opinions that I would have thought were entirely uncontroversial. I'm pretty sure that everyone on here gets the idea of due process, presumption of innocence, etc., in a legal context. Now, Jose was talking about the Court of Public Opinion, which is of course justice at its most marsupial. There will always be a clamour for summary justice from the public at large: X should resign just because he's been accused of something and it sounds plausible. But intelligent people like us ought not to indulge in this; at the very least we should refrain from engaging in such knee-jerk responses; at best we ought to be leading our fellow humans in demanding that the accused be afforded the rights that they would have in a proper court of law: in particular, the aforementioned presumption of innocence; the right to defend oneself and provide one's own version of events; even the right to remain silent without this being taken as incriminating in itself.

Spoiler:
I'm frustrated that, after three tries, I've finally had to give up on going to local marches to protest Trump's hatred and indecency. All three times, I've left early and in disgust, because so many numbers of protesters around me have been either chanting or waving slogans of sexual violence like "Fuck Trump." Just as we can't fight fire with fire, we can't fight hatred, indecency, and rape culture with hatred, indecency, and rape culture. We just can't.

This gave me some pause, because, although I'd accept that saying "Fuck Trump" is an aggressive speech act, probably best avoided by those seeking the moral high ground, I didn't really think of it as incitement to sexual violence. Pinker's The Stuff of Thought is quite interesting on this kind of thing. "Fuck you", he explains, is the current form of "damn you": in recent years sexual swear-words have replaced religious ones, but this isn't necessarily done with any real consideration to the literal meaning that results. I myself am liable, at times of stress, to come out with nonsensical utterances like "Cock almighty!" or "For the love of fuck!"
xtifr wrote:... and orthogon merely sounds undecided.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26453
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:36 pm UTC

Pfhorrest wrote:Not judging at all is also an option.
It's still a judgment, though. You're judging that the evidence on neither side is compelling enough to outweigh the evidence on the other side.

Sometimes that's true, but other times it's just people being willfully obtuse in order to maintain their facade of "enlightened disinterest".

In cases like sexual harassment, "refusing to take sides" generally amounts to siding with the harasser, every time there is one.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10130
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:49 pm UTC

The evidence that gets reported, anyway. As they say in the media, never let the truth get in the way of a good story...

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 6:58 pm UTC

orthogon wrote:But intelligent people like us ought not to indulge in this; at the very least we should refrain from engaging in such knee-jerk responses; at best we ought to be leading our fellow humans in demanding that the accused be afforded the rights that they would have in a proper court of law: in particular, the aforementioned presumption of innocence; the right to defend oneself and provide one's own version of events; even the right to remain silent without this being taken as incriminating in itself.
As a rule, I believe people when they tell me something -- unless I am given good reason not to.

If you tell me that you were sexually harassed by Stan, I'm going to say "wtf, Stan" when I see him. Accusing someone of sexual harassment nets you very little gain and can carry significant consequences for you; I have no reason to disbelieve you. Stan has every reason to deny it, though, so I'll be slower to believe him. The certainty of my belief increases as more people accuse Stan of sexual harassment.

I am not a judge. I do not exist in a courtroom. I am not passing legal sentencing upon Stan. To demand I exert the scrutiny and rigor of a justice system when expressing my opinion of Stan is absurd.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7477
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Zamfir » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:14 pm UTC

Ninjaed:

Orthogon, I guess we'll have to disagree on this. As I see it, criminal courts have exceptional power of punishment, they declare sentences that would be severe crimes in any other context. That is why they also have to meet exceptional standards to do so. Standards that do not even apply to courts in general, only to criminal cases.

I don't see the value of using those standards in other situations without this exceptional power to punish. I definitely don't see some great moral need to use those exceptional standards.

That doesn't mean no standards. It just means the regular standards that you use to judge the trustworthiness of people in your life. Or more to the point: the standards that journalists use to publish articles. For example, that includes a right to present an own version of the events. But not a right to stay silent without incriminating effect. That is not a standard you apply generally in your life, and it's just weird to insist on it when people near you are accused of sexual harassment.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:27 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:That doesn't mean no standards. It just means the regular standards that you use to judge the trustworthiness of people in your life. Or more to the point: the standards that journalists use to publish articles. For example, that includes a right to present an own version of the events. But not a right to stay silent without incriminating effect. That is not a standard you apply generally in your life, and it's just weird to insist on it when people near you are accused of sexual harassment.
I know it's not *entirely* relevant (because we're talking about people accusing people we don't actually know), but can you imagine applying this standard in our daily lives?

"John, my wife just told me you slapped her backside and groped her in the elevator. Is this true?"

"..."

"Well, your silence isn't much of a defense, but it's not incriminating, either. I guess I'll just have to find some more evidence before I can have an opinion on this matter."

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6476
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ucim » Mon Feb 12, 2018 7:58 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:"John, my wife just told me you slapped her backside and groped her in the elevator. Is this true?"
"Honey, someone on the internet told me you were slapping people's backsides and groping people in the elevator. Is that true?"

"..."

"I realize you may not think this accusation is worthy of a reply, but I'm calling my bank and my lawyer right now."

Which cherry would you like?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:02 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
The Great Hippo wrote:"John, my wife just told me you slapped her backside and groped her in the elevator. Is this true?"
"Honey, someone on the internet told me you were slapping people's backsides and groping people in the elevator. Is that true?"

"..."

"I realize you may not think this accusation is worthy of a reply, but I'm calling my bank and my lawyer right now."

Which cherry would you like?

Jose

Because the accusations against Trump, Roy Moore etc have come from random, unnamed people on the internet?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6476
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ucim » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:11 pm UTC

Mutex wrote:Because the accusations against Trump, Roy Moore etc have come from random, unnamed people on the internet?
We were applying the idea to our own daily lives. My daily life does not involve Trump, Roy Moore, or etc.

Point is, actions other than the results of a court trial do have consequences. Even a tweet can have live-changing consequences. Newspapers are good for helping form opinions (subject to the standing of the newspaper reporting), but are not good for rallying pitchforks... not by themselves. The standard for pitchforks should be higher.

And to the post that spawned this subdiscussion, calling for the resignation of somebody merely based on an accusation (even if by a dead tree newspaper) also needs a higher standard, lest we become what we rally against.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:14 pm UTC

ucim wrote:"Honey, someone on the internet told me you were slapping people's backsides and groping people in the elevator. Is that true?"

"..."

"I realize you may not think this accusation is worthy of a reply, but I'm calling my bank and my lawyer right now."

Which cherry would you like?

Jose
The Great Hippo wrote:I know it's not *entirely* relevant
Are you... are you seriously cherry-picking my quote so you can complain about cherry-picking? o_O

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7477
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Zamfir » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:35 pm UTC

Ucim, are you seriously suggesting that you would, in that situation, claim the right to remain silent in order not to incriminate yourself, and that your wife should (or would) accept that without further consequences?

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:39 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Mutex wrote:Because the accusations against Trump, Roy Moore etc have come from random, unnamed people on the internet?
We were applying the idea to our own daily lives. My daily life does not involve Trump, Roy Moore, or etc.

Point is, actions other than the results of a court trial do have consequences. Even a tweet can have live-changing consequences. Newspapers are good for helping form opinions (subject to the standing of the newspaper reporting), but are not good for rallying pitchforks... not by themselves. The standard for pitchforks should be higher.

And to the post that spawned this subdiscussion, calling for the resignation of somebody merely based on an accusation (even if by a dead tree newspaper) also needs a higher standard, lest we become what we rally against.

Jose

But noone is saying we should call for the resignation of anyone based on an anonymous allegation made by some unnamed person on the internet, so your comparison didn't make sense. The people making the accusations are putting their names and faces in the public eye.

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6476
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ucim » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:47 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:Are you... are you seriously cherry-picking my quote so you can complain about cherry-picking? o_O
Yes... but there was only one cherry to be picked, so I thought that was fair.

Zamfir wrote:Ucim, are you seriously suggesting that you would, in that situation, claim the right to remain silent in order not to incriminate yourself, and that your wife should (or would) accept that without further consequences?
No (though I note that you're assuming I'm guilty - which has yet to be established). I am claiming that my decision to remain silent (or to stare gape-jawed thinking "dafuq?" to myself) should not be taken as an admission of guilt. Especially in the (personal-life) version where the accusation is from a random person on the net. (And in this particular example I happened to be innocent.) Point being, personal examples can also work both ways.

I still hold that "if true, that politician should resign" is very different from "that politician should resign". I'm surprised (and saddened) that this view doesn't get much traction. It's why we are where we are - where actual truth doesn't matter, and allegations are sufficient.

Mutex wrote:But noone is saying we should call for the resignation of anyone based on an anonymous allegation...
...but they are saying we should call for said resignation based solely on allegation, anonymous or not. The allegation that Obama was foreign-born and Clinton was the founder of ISIS was also not anonymous. The person making that allegation put his name and face in the public eye, and was rewarded with the Presidency of the United States.

Do you not see where this is going?

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:53 pm UTC

ucim wrote:
Mutex wrote:But noone is saying we should call for the resignation of anyone based on an anonymous allegation...

...but they are saying we should call for said resignation based solely on allegation, anonymous or not. The allegation that Obama was foreign-born and Clinton was the founder of ISIS was also not anonymous. The person making that allegation put his name and face in the public eye, and was rewarded with the Presidency of the United States.

Do you not see where this is going?

Jose

Except both those accusations are easily debunked, and came from a well-known bullshitter. And frankly, I think a politician who tells blatant lies SHOULD face calls for resignation. Hell, I'd be happy if it was the law that politicians who tell proven deliberate lies get immediately fired. How can we trust them to run the country when we can't trust anything they say?

Obviously Trump's standards are so low these easily debunked lies just seem normal.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 8:57 pm UTC

Mutex wrote:But noone is saying we should call for the resignation of anyone based on an anonymous allegation made by some unnamed person on the internet, so your comparison didn't make sense. The people making the accusations are putting their names and faces in the public eye.
Right -- or at the very least they're putting their names and faces out to organizations that are investigating the claims before making them public (see the MPR/Keillor situation).

In the case of the public accusations, part of the reason I believe them is because of this. I accept that I exist in a world where people will either flat-out lie or misremember a situation for various fucked up reasons I don't understand. I don't accept that this is at all a normal occurrence, particularly not in the context of sexual harassment.

People who throw out false accusations for personal or political gain are probably not going to last long in a professional environment; at the very least, they'll probably have a well-documented history of deceptive behavior. And, as has been mentioned previously in this thread many times over -- accusing someone of sexual harassment puts you at significant risk.

I'm not saying we need to throw our skepticism out in the trash. But believing these claims -- particularly when we have so many good reasons to do so -- is definitely something we should try to do.
ucim wrote:Yes... but there was only one cherry to be picked, so I thought that was fair.
You left out the part of my post where I said it wasn't relevant for the explicit reason you outlined in your post. And then you accused me of cherry-picking (which doesn't even make sense; I didn't cherry-pick anything).
ucim wrote:...but they are saying we should call for said resignation based solely on allegation, anonymous or not. The allegation that Obama was foreign-born and Clinton was the founder of ISIS was also not anonymous. The person making that allegation put his name and face in the public eye, and was rewarded with the Presidency of the United States.

Do you not see where this is going?

Jose
"This person physically and/or verbally sexually harassed me" is much, much different than "The President was born in Kenya/Clinton is the leader of ISIS".

The latter is a claim based on a thing you read. The former is a claim based on a thing that happened to you.

elasto
Posts: 3550
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby elasto » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:50 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:The latter is a claim based on a thing you read. The former is a claim based on a thing that happened to you.

In addition, so long sexual assault carries this huge stigma of shame and guilt for the victim, all things being equal we ought to tend towards belief.

(Yes, it's ridiculous in this day and age that to be the victim of sexual assault should carry the burden of shame ("She has been defiled") and guilt ("What did she do to lead him on?" + "She should have done more to stop him"), but that tends to mean that only the most mentally disturbed or sociopathic will make a false claim - in which case it's probably not their first such claim...)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10130
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Feb 12, 2018 9:54 pm UTC

elasto wrote:(...but that tends to mean that only the most mentally disturbed or sociopathic will make a false claim - in which case it's probably not their first such claim...)


How large would you say that fraction is? That is, the fraction of women disturbed enough to make a false rape claim.

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:02 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:
elasto wrote:(...but that tends to mean that only the most mentally disturbed or sociopathic will make a false claim - in which case it's probably not their first such claim...)


How large would you say that fraction is? That is, the fraction of women disturbed enough to make a false rape claim.

Psychopaths make up roughly 1/150 of the population and are overwhelmingly men, so that cause would be vanishingly tiny.

(As for suffering from psychotic delusions, I don't have figures for that to hand and am a little bit busy to research it right now.)

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:05 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:How large would you say that fraction is? That is, the fraction of women disturbed enough to make a false rape claim.
Do you think this is a question anyone would legitimately know the answer to? Nevermind whether or not it's a question even worth answering (or asking, for that matter).

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6476
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ucim » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:22 pm UTC

The Great Hippo wrote:The latter is a claim based on a thing you read.
No, the latter (claim) was made by Donald Trump, and it's not clear he reads anything.

Mutex wrote:...came from a well-known bullshitter. And frankly, I think a politician who tells blatant lies...
But this is literally begging the question. If you already know whether something is true (or not), there's no need for evidence or testimony in the first place.

And again, that's my point. I'd get on board with "if true, that politician should resign". It's the leaving out of the bolded part that has me in a knot. Even if you're pretty sure it's true, it explicitly shows that allegation is not sufficient. Leaving it out implies that allegation is sufficient.

I'd even go with "if true, and I'm pretty sure it is, that politician should resign".

But the blanket acceptance of allegation as fact is simply not acceptable in an enlightened society.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:25 pm UTC

Don't we accept witness statements as evidence in court?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6476
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby ucim » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:27 pm UTC

Mutex wrote:Don't we accept witness statements as evidence in court?
No. They are subject to cross-examination, and to their relationship to other evidence, all presented under oath. Witness statements are not sufficient in and of themselves to convict.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Please help addams if you can. She needs all of us.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7097
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby The Great Hippo » Mon Feb 12, 2018 10:45 pm UTC

ucim wrote:No. They are subject to cross-examination, and to their relationship to other evidence, all presented under oath. Witness statements are not sufficient in and of themselves to convict.

Jose
What about two, three, four, or even more witnesses -- all of which are corroborated by people who did not witness the event, but confirm the witnesses in question discussed these events with them prior to the case going to trial?

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:05 pm UTC

I was wondering about a situation where eight people saw someone pick up a lead bar and beat someone to death with it, without getting blood splashes on them, then wipe their prints off the bat. No physical evidence they did it, just eight independent witnesses who saw it, and whose claims are not inconsistent with any physical evidence from the scene. There's nothing linking the eight witnesses, they're not all in a club or something.

Would that really not be enough to convict?

(EDIT: I guess one difference with that scenario is there is at least evidence a crime took place: a dead body.)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10130
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:41 pm UTC

Also evidence that the victim died of blunt force trauma, consistent with witness testimony. In a rape case, you might get some evidence of trauma, which of course the rapist might claim was just "rough sex".

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:44 pm UTC

But if the witnesses are lying, they're hardly going to say they saw the defendant shoot the victim. The accusations are basically the only evidence you have.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10130
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:47 pm UTC

I think that's enough to convict, if the alleged murderer can't provide evidence they were elsewhere. People have been convicted of murder on less tenuous grounds.

Mutex
Posts: 1364
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:32 pm UTC

Re: Sexual Harrassment Epidemic

Postby Mutex » Mon Feb 12, 2018 11:49 pm UTC

Ok well, isn't that basically the evidence against Roy Moore? Eight independent witnesses, whose claims are not inconsistent with physical evidence?

Minus the dead body though.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests