mama cass
Rock n' Roll Doggie VIP PASS
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2004
- Messages
- 6,293
Nick66 you're making me feel nervous - i'm not used to you agreeing with me
Nick66 you're making me feel nervous - i'm not used to you agreeing with me
There was an interesting article I read recently about the differences between American and French feminism (including Americans relative tolerance for women in some countries being forced cover themselves, and the French disdain for it)
on a happier note, you're REALLY making me sad that we've postponed a planned trip to France this summer. it is a wonderful, wonderful country, and i was eating up every word you were writing about it.
*le sigh*
this is an interesting one, as the French Left itself has been split over this issue, taking the burkini as an example, i.e., between those who feel that women should be free to dress as they please and wear the burkini if they choose to do so, and those who feel it shouldn't be tolerated in France as it symbolizes the oppression of women which goes against the values of the Republic...
In France it's socially acceptable to whip out your testicles and put them on sleeping people at parties.
Or to show them during beer pong to distract your opponent.
In France it's socially acceptable to whip out your testicles and put them on sleeping people at parties.
Or to show them during beer pong to distract your opponent.
In France it's socially acceptable to whip out your testicles and put them on sleeping people at parties.
Or to show them during beer pong to distract your opponent.
anitram - if i recall correctly, you're a lawyer right? don't you think that men should have the right to a fair trial and let the courts apply the sanctions? the whole trial by media/twitter is disturbing to me
I maybe a bit sarcastic at times (something I know I need to work on, but I feel like I give as good as I get), but...damn. "Right wing commentator"...."pathetic"...and which woman am I arguing with about her own experiences? I thought I laid out my comments (in a discussion with antiram) reasonably, and you come back with this?
You know, Cobbler, you're an interesting case...it's almost like there's two Cobblers. I've seen you make some pretty thoughtful posts on here. A while ago, you made a long one about some Aussie band you had seen at a club (I can't recall the name), and how good they were and how much it moved you and how it was one of the best nights of your life in terms of listening to music. You were so effusive in your praise that a few people gave you (good natured) shit about it I think. It was fucking beautiful...your sheer enthusiasm made me go to Youtube and listen to them (they were pretty good, and had a lot of charisma as I remember). I was actually going to reply, or send you a PM about it, because it was inspiring to read something stated so passionately yet eloquently....when you want to be you can be good writer. But then you later went and said something like the above and I thought, "well, yeah....never mind"
It seems that being a celebrity now renders women mute, powerless, and entirely without agency and dependent upon men to read their minds when hooking up with them in their Tribeca apartments. But at least there are internet publications that will run your story about a bad date with a wildly successful but possibly obnoxious male comedian.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/...ent.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.google.com/
This is the kind of thinking I can't support. To make the claim that a man might be branded a sexual predator for asking a woman out or holding a door is simply a tactic to delegitimize a very serious and important movement, an effort to depict women who have spoken up as hypersensitive or misandrist. No one is looking to spin awkward flirting into Weinstein-esque predatory behavior.
I think if you are talking about criminal sanctions, yes. But the court of public opinion has NEVER worked that way.
And even in the private workplace, if it is a well run place, there is no need for a man to go to trial to be sanctioned by Human Resources for sexual harassment. What happens subsequent to that action with respect to termination, going before labour boards or the courts is a separate matter. But I don't think the women should continue to be harassed until the guy is declared guilty by the courts.
I had a very astute law professor, who actually incidentally attended Yale Law together with Bill and Hillary and had some interesting insights, comment that we have come to expect the legal system to fix all of our social problems but that is neither what the legal system was designed to do nor what it is well suited to doing. The long history of sexual assault and harassment of women, which goes back to the beginning of time, can be dealt with in some extent by the law but that is really the last step, a blunt tool. What we are talking about now is how to change social attitudes, how to better raise our sons, how to look at structural issues within industries, etc. That should not be conflated with fair trials and criminal justice being doled out.
Separately I don't understand the constant references to Saint Meryl Streep. I have never written about her to my recollection, I don't watch movies because she is in them, hell I barely watch anything at all and have no idea how suddenly her name is being put forward as some sort of barometer for those of us concerned with sexual harassment. I don't give a flying fuck whom she supports, what she says or anything she thinks really.
Irvine, how you have fallen in my view. What a view to take away from this article. Instead of going on the defence, why don't we have a discussion about how a lot of the things mentioned in this article sound pretty awful?
All the women that I love and respect are saying that the article is rife with behaviours that they recognise, behaviours that have repeatedly throughout their lives made them feel uncomfortable.
It's really disappointing to read a post from a poster as thoughtful as yourself that reads just like every other centrist reactionary on twitter.
I think this sort of discussion has revealed some people's limits in their support for feminism. It's been fairly enlightening.
I think this sort of discussion has revealed some people's limits in their support for feminism. It's been fairly enlightening.
But the social media, "shut up and listen"/"always believe women all the time no matter what" feminism? Women as perpetual victims who should be treated as infants without agency feminism? Yeah, not on board with that. The latter in fact is the least feminist thing I can think of...and is part of the difference, for example, in American and French feminism (broadly speaking) that was being discussed earlier.
How you are wrapping this up any other way is beyond me.
I might just take this time to reflect on myself, listen to what women are saying, and then reflect on how we can make a better world'?.
Why exactly France is being presented as some kind of bellwether on sexual ethics is beyond me.
What you have to allow for and consider is that people can do that and still come to different conclusions than you. Someone not agreeing with you doesn't mean their opinion is ill considered.
Irvine, how you have fallen in my view. What a view to take away from this article. Instead of going on the defence, why don't we have a discussion about how a lot of the things mentioned in this article sound pretty awful?
All the women that I love and respect are saying that the article is rife with behaviours that they recognise, behaviours that have repeatedly throughout their lives made them feel uncomfortable.
It's really disappointing to read a post from a poster as thoughtful as yourself that reads just like every other centrist reactionary on twitter.
but the main thing is that there is no crime here. there is no imbalance of power here, unless we're going to assume that being a celebrity male gives you a power that leads women to say yes when they really mean no. there is also no due process, no privacy, swift rushes to judgment, and i think we'd be naive to think that, with the benefits of online anonymity, that some bad actors won't take this movement as a chance to air grievances and ruin careers.
for what it's worth, i believe her. but i don't agree with her.
all this behavior is indeed regrettable. he sounds like he was a jerk. but i didn't need to know ANY of it. this is not my business, it is not your business. it's gossip and hearsay, and also probably true. this is the airing of dirty laundry, of a date that went poorly when an entitled, selfish celebrity treated someone not well. and i also believe that women have agency, that many women would have ended the date, or, you know, not consensually received and reciprocated oral sex. or, if they did, at least understood how that was going to be perceived.
what bothers me most about the presentation of "Grace's" story is that sex is something that men do to women, that it's men who hold the power in any hook up and must read minds. it is precisely the fact that i am a feminist (and have identified as one since the mid-90s, i was in a gender equality club in high school and talked about rape culture to other sophomores who looked at me like i was crazy) that i find this situation exactly what #metoo needs to not be doing. training men is better is one thing, but training women to be assertive and speak up is another, because if you don't do both, all the power stays with men.