BristolUK

There's something that's been bothering me in all this for a few days now. Maybe it's because I'm a guardian reader but I'm feeling a little shell shocked. And, yes, I know that's not as bad as falling victim to these behaviours mainly exhibited by men over women.

But it concerns me that it's all being bracketed together, be it the movie biz, politics, media, other workplace, whatever.

And yes, there is a connection, the patriarchy. But it's not all equal, just the same as all crimes are not equal.

Over the last couple of weeks I've read or heard of coercion, deceit, rape, plying with booze and/or drugs flirty text messages, sideways glances , leering, groping, touching etc and there seems to be little distinction made.

The Guardian has carried at least a dozen different reports and opinion pieces since Sunday, and many more prior to that. All saying much the same thing.

One item yesterday names a dozen offenders, some with no information at all, some with snippets and some with a bit more.
Suggestive messages. Serious allegations. Getting someone to buy a vibrator. Improper sexual advances. A knee touch so fleeting the woman admitted she could believe it didn't happen. Pressuring someone to go on a date with a friend. Rubbing up against during a hug. A grope. An unwanted pass.

They are all very different. That one is described as improper sexual advances while another an unwanted pass surely illustrates the difference.

Yet they are all reported and commented on together.

That hand on shoulder might wander or it might just be an over-familiarity with someone regardless of gender or age. It's not the same as forcing someone to pass through a doorway so you can rub up against them nor is it the same as coercion or outright force. Yet the accused are ending up on the same list or, at least, in the same report.

I don't defend the behaviours but without some distinction one can see why expressions like witch hunt are coming to the fore. And the danger is that those people (mainly men) who may be prepared to accept that there really is a problem with male behaviour and perhaps even play a part in doing something about it, may be less likely to do so when making a pass at or having a sideways glance is put forward as major harassment or assault.

There's another danger too.

Comments about the named and shamed father of two after unspecified allegations but believed to range from groping to unwanted attention and 'inappropriate touching' had put him in the same spotlight glare and therefore as bad as the rapists and career blockers, led to his suicide.

Shard

You may have seen in the Guardian (or other UK news source) that a Welsh MP, Carl Sargeant has taken his own life after very vague allegations of impropriety. So far, it appears that he wasn't even fully aware of what the allegations were, so it seems he would take his own life, unless there was something even more sinister in his closet of which nobody was aware.

BristolUK

Perhaps you fell asleep before you got to the end of my essay. That was exactly who I meant.

And today, a new article, either blissfully ignorant of what happened when a family lost their husband and father or not giving a damn, the guardian follows with "What happens to women who complain of sexual harassment: ‘You’re branded a troublemaker’
Is it whataboutery to ask what happens to a Man accused of the unknown, by the unknown, but included with the rapists and abusers?

Shard

Oops, yes.

BristolUK

Yes you fell asleep?

BristolUK

Following on from that, today we have yet another opinion piece.
At last, I thought, as it started with "I’ve found myself feeling a little sorry for some of the men who’ve lost their jobs or had their reputations ruined because of harassment allegations. Not the Weinsteins of the world, of course, but the men accused of more ‘minor’ infringements; of behavior that falls into those famous ‘gray areas’."

But see that 'minor' as if it's not really minor at all? Even though, relatively speaking, it is minor, hence the "not the Weinsteins of this world". Come on, make up your mind. If you want to single him out then surely that's because the others are not as bad isn't it? Okay, everything short of Weinstein isn't minor, but clearly some of it is. Relatively.

The writer moves on. "But those gray areas aren’t really that gray, are they?" and I must admit I haven't heard anyone suggest they are. I've not even heard grey area used in this context.

Some have said it's just banter when it's probably actually crass or worse.

"Most adults are able to behave like decent human beings, to know the difference between appropriate and inappropriate behavior. To know when flirting crosses the line."

And there, perhaps, we have it. Flirting is okay, so long as it doesn't cross the line. Where's the line though?

It would be foolish to suggest everyone draws their line in the same place. So between those lines grey area would, all things considered, be a good expression wouldn't it? Everyone's expected to know where every other individual's line is? And how about where someone's line is a bit closer than normal because they actually quite fancy the one they're flirting with (hence them flirting ) Or the other person is married, say, and it's assumed the line won't be crossed.

Unless the writer believes everyone's line is in exactly the same place and stays there, person to person, then she's actually just drawn attention to the grey area without realising it.

jerryhung

I think this is where the disconnect is dbd.

I am only talking about the women he sexually assaulted, raped, coerced. That is VERY different from the women who did the above (bolded)

Why are we talking about two different things? This whole thread is about the former.

David Bois is a shit and I'm glad the NYT are publicly embarrassing him. So are ex Mossad agents, this is what they do? I thought it was funny that the Mossad spy "Anna" was so disbelievable that the journalist thought her recounting of a 'Harvey assaut' was like soap opera acting.

jerryhung

Did you even read the articles? Do you not understand what rape/assault looks like? And here you are still arguing or imagining that these women agreed to it for "favors".

Incidentally apparently Seagal also tried to rape a few. Are there any decent men left?

Agree with BristolUK that the public shaming needs to be carefully managed, and yet the flip side is without the voice of social media, these people (Spacey, Seagal, Weinstein) would never have been outed.

BristolUK

I poured out all those words and you said it in a bloody sentence.

jerryhung

Actually, I thorougly enjoyed your well thought out post BristolUK, it was much better laid out and argued

jerryhung

I think we are talking about different things - we must be that is the only way I can compute this one Cheers J.

BristolUK

Guardian still steaming along on but they did carry this, today, albeit in relation to Hollywood only.
One of the guardian writers was quite bitchy listing deniers (who were not actually deniers so much as those with similar unease) including two former guardian writers. Remembering that I am a guardian lover, hell hath no fury like a guardian writer scorned?

There was a reference to one of the - whisper it - daily mail columnists. Jan Moir.

I confess I took a look. It's quite clearly a hatchet job on the accuser, but there is plenty there to make one question the motives. Poor choice of headline though Jan Moir: Kate Maltby is making a big fuss about nothing | Daily Mail Online

BristolUK

I had dinner with Steven Seagal, and I'm not surprised by the latest accusations
She begins by observing the other guests are 8 buxom blonde women. So she has noted their hair colour and breasts. She says he spent the whole time talking about himself. She also said "As dinner wrapped up and we ate the last of our dessert, I watched Seagal finger his mala beads, spellbound by the cleavage of the most buxom girl at the table. In that moment I very much hoped that the Buddhist beliefs were true and that in his next life Seagal would be reincarnated as a beautiful woman, with massive boobs." So he saw the same thing she did then.

It all seemed much about nothing really - albeit there are more serious accusations about Seagal, just not in this trashy piece.

I googled the writer. She is a former WAG. She's not shy as the images pages show. And she has a kiss and tell book out, serialised in the Australian equivalent of The Sun.

Did nobody check?

It seems the Guardian has boobed. Ooh er missus.

Double standards as well as falling ones.

jerryhung

Good wife star said she managed to escape getting raped by Seagal by "screaming her way out of there".

BristolUK

The odd thing is that with accusations like that and more flying around about Seagal, an article saying he did nothing more than talk about himself over a long dinner with buxom blondes (one of whom's cleavage he found distracting) would likely be something to say in defence. "Creepy but not dangerous" sort of thing.

Bit strange really.

They opened comments on the article by mistake - or that's what they said when every single comment posted was a negative (but not defensive or enabling) one, along with very high "recommends".

Glad I'm not the only Guardian reader with a few reservations on how they're approaching all this.