Sexual Harassment- It's nearly time for clemency (opinion)

[Fawlty]

'Won't someone think of the rapists!'

Maude Philanders?

I'm surprised more people don't agree with me actually. There's a split that's like 60-40 between people who want no mercy dealing with a widespread problem, and people who think it's a fight against illegitimate feminism. I'm not the biggest fan of taking the middle ground, but it seems like this is a spot for that.

 

[Peteyandjia]

Maude Philanders?

I'm surprised more people don't agree with me actually. There's a split that's like 60-40 between people who want no mercy dealing with a widespread problem, and people who think it's a fight against illegitimate feminism. I'm not the biggest fan of taking the middle ground, but it seems like this is a spot for that.

I think people tend to get more touchy (heh) and emotional when it comes to crimes, or perceived crimes, involving sex. Multiply that by the emboldened anonymous forum guy effect, and I think maybe it's hard (heh) to gauge exactly how people really feel about how this stuff should be fairly judged. A lot of people just have a knee-jerk reaction, which is why the media loves selling this shit as much as possible. Both justified and not.

 

[Quipling]

Maude Philanders?

I'm surprised more people don't agree with me actually. There's a split that's like 60-40 between people who want no mercy dealing with a widespread problem, and people who think it's a fight against illegitimate feminism. I'm not the biggest fan of taking the middle ground, but it seems like this is a spot for that.

I'm sympathetic with your position, but I don't actually agree.

I spoke to a close relative who left a (reasonably high powered, well-paying) job because of repeated come-ons from her boss while she was married with intimations that reciprocation would be expected for future advancement. She's not exactly a feminist or a prude, but when it comes to this, she's of the opinion that pretty much anyone who engages in that behavior should be tossed out.

Going back to your systemic statement, I think we should distinguish between behavior that is pervasive and behavior that is universal. If behavior was previously universal, and standards changed, that's one thing. But instead we have creepy behavior that was common to a minority of the population. Widespread enough that most women have encountered it, but most people encounter hundreds of people in a position to harass them or otherwise creep.

I think that, as gutlessly political as the Franken move was at its core it is closer to the correct approach than most. Clemency is not. Neither are burnings. The process that we've already put in place is actually not a bad one but it must actually be applied properly, and most places have not done so. This is a great opportunity to put teeth in those review processes.

Of course, CK is a bit of an odd bird. Out of all the credible (and confessed to) claims out there, his is the most pathetic. It wasn't aggresive or particularly coercive - he asked for permission. The problem was the setting and insensitivity, and the other problem he's going to have is that an unstructured work environment like that doesn't have the boundaries - or the regulatory bodies - that help sort these things out. Franken's behavior appears to have been worse, but there is a mechanism for dealing with that. CK doesn't have that, so in some ways, he's more fucked.

In the end, let's not forget that while we might struggle to determine the right punishment, these are arguments of condemnation+mitigation, not of support. You aren't doing the same thing as voting for a child molester.

 

[Fawlty]

I'm sympathetic with your position, but I don't actually agree.

I spoke to a close relative who left a (reasonably high powered, well-paying) job because of repeated come-ons from her boss while she was married with intimations that reciprocation would be expected for future advancement. She's not exactly a feminist or a prude, but when it comes to this, she's of the opinion that pretty much anyone who engages in that behavior should be tossed out.

Going back to your systemic statement, I think we should distinguish between behavior that is pervasive and behavior that is universal. If behavior was previously universal, and standards changed, that's one thing. But instead we have creepy behavior that was common to a minority of the population. Widespread enough that most women have encountered it, but most people encounter hundreds of people in a position to harass them or otherwise creep.

I think that, as gutlessly political as the Franken move was at its core it is closer to the correct approach than most. Clemency is not. Neither are burnings. The process that we've already put in place is actually not a bad one but it must actually be applied properly, and most places have not done so. This is a great opportunity to put teeth in those review processes.

Of course, CK is a bit of an odd bird. Out of all the credible (and confessed to) claims out there, his is the most pathetic. It wasn't aggresive or particularly coercive - he asked for permission. The problem was the setting and insensitivity, and the other problem he's going to have is that an unstructured work environment like that doesn't have the boundaries - or the regulatory bodies - that help sort these things out. Franken's behavior appears to have been worse, but there is a mechanism for dealing with that. CK doesn't have that, so in some ways, he's more fucked.

In the end, let's not forget that while we might struggle to determine the right punishment, these are arguments of condemnation+mitigation, not of support. You aren't doing the same thing as voting for a child molester.

So to get this straight, here's an example: A man becomes the subject of rumors, and then cops to having harassed women at work in the past, makes his apologies etc. For argument's sake let's say it was definitely fireable today, though it slid by in the past, and is not criminal. According to most people and how I read your post, he should get no consideration for confessing- just straight out the door. I think there's room for some mercy there, or else what is being learned? Make it a suspension and put him on probation. Or we what, blackball something like 10% of the male population? We can still out people and punish them, but we should be careful about that.

 

[Quipling]

So to get this straight, here's an example: A man becomes the subject of rumors, and then cops to having harassed women at work in the past, makes his apologies etc. For argument's sake let's say it was definitely fireable today, though it slid by in the past, and is not criminal. According to most people and how I read your post, he should get no consideration for confessing- just straight out the door. I think there's room for some mercy there, or else what is being learned? Make it a suspension and put him on probation. Or we what, blackball something like 10% of the male population? We can still out people and punish them, but we should be careful about that.

I think there's a lot of space between firing+blackballing and clemency. Social tarnish is inevitable, and for some, that will be defacto blackballing.

But for others, we do have solutions. Often, these involve modest procedural limits: a full punishment a decade or more after a non-criminal indiscretion may not be appropriate. It is for ongoing behavior. Instead, we have probationary periods, mandatory retraining, removal from levers of power or perks. Those people are no longer trusted for meetings, organizing functions, etc.

We have a process for this. It needs to be adjusted, but it can sort through and distinguish the Weinsteins from the CKs.

 

[The Diplomat]

So to get this straight, here's an example: A man becomes the subject of rumors, and then cops to having harassed women at work in the past, makes his apologies etc. For argument's sake let's say it was definitely fireable today, though it slid by in the past, and is not criminal. According to most people and how I read your post, he should get no consideration for confessing- just straight out the door. I think there's room for some mercy there, or else what is being learned? Make it a suspension and put him on probation. Or we what, blackball something like 10% of the male population? We can still out people and punish them, but we should be careful about that.

I think the slippery slope has far been surpassed, as far as unproveable accusations go. I want to weed out the assholes and rid the world of this power hungry entity like anyone else, but when it's one person's word vs an entire career, there should be some proof IMO. Just to end a legacy because they grabbed your ass in 1975 is overdoing it.

At the same time, maybe all these accusations are correct, and everyone is a pervy sleezebag. Then the entertainment world just got a lot darker.

 

[Fawlty]

I think there's a lot of space between firing+blackballing and clemency. Social tarnish is inevitable, and for some, that will be defacto blackballing.

But for others, we do have solutions. Often, these involve modest procedural limits: a full punishment a decade or more after a non-criminal indiscretion may not be appropriate. It is for ongoing behavior. Instead, we have probationary periods, mandatory retraining, removal from levers of power or perks. Those people are no longer trusted for meetings, organizing functions, etc.

We have a process for this. It needs to be adjusted, but it can sort through and distinguish the Weinsteins from the CKs.

Wanted to note too that you considered Franken's thing as really serious, worse than what Louis did. That's really strange to me.

We can disregard the "groping" photo immediately. Fucking horseshit that he's "groping" her via not actually touching her kevlar vest. And the kiss he disputes. If stealing a kiss from a rehearsal is assault, I've assaulted and have been assaulted a bunch of times, along with literally every actor & actress I came up with through theater. Backstage of a USO tour has never been a professional environment- though that's probably going to change, which is fine. She doesn't seem like a particularly trustworthy source, either. Most likely didn't go down quite the way she claims, imo.

I also think you're underestimating the momentum toward blackballing people, rather than what I suggest, which is to punish people but give them some mercy, and maybe just straight up forgive them if they'll come clean. Don't fire a guy for grabbing an ass ten years ago. While I thought that should be really obvious, it's not at all. And I'm not looking to the other end of this thing for comrades, either- the ones who have been calling witch hunt. Too bad, babies, you don't get to harass people anymore. So sorry man.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Wanted to note too that you considered Franken's thing as really serious, worse than what Louis did. That's really strange to me.

It looks to me like people kind of think that fucking Franken over for relatively minor stuff is an acceptable to price to pay to enforce a very hard line on sexual harassment. The left has been really anxious to nail someone they like to show their seriousness.

 

[Fawlty]

It looks to me like people kind of thing that fucking Franken over for relatively minor stuff is an acceptable to price to pay to enforce a very hard line on sexual harassment. In particular, the left has been really anxious to nail someone they like to show their seriousness.

There is that urge on the left frequently (which the right is constantly trying to cultivate, and successfully with the last election). All the easier when it hits on a liberal value like gender equality. I make sure to speak out against that, like the twin garbage ideas that there is a really influential far left ruining everything, and a right wing establishment left that is identical to Republicans. Both of those are dead wrong, but the right would have us pick our poison.

It's understandable that there's an urge toward that today with the harassment revelations. I guess that's enough of a motive to urge mercy all by itself, to guard against overreaction, but the specifics of the allegations also lead me to think most of the charges are not as serious as we pretend, with major exceptions.

 

[jrams]

I think the slippery slope has far been surpassed, as far as unproveable accusations go. I want to weed out the assholes and rid the world of this power hungry entity like anyone else, but when it's one person's word vs an entire career, there should be some proof IMO. Just to end a legacy because they grabbed your ass in 1975 is overdoing it.

At the same time, maybe all these accusations are correct, and everyone is a pervy sleezebag. Then the entertainment world just got a lot darker.

Who has denied their allegations and still lost/harmed their career over it? Danny Masterson has had many rape allegations for months, denied them, and kept his role in Netflix. Same with Ed Westwick who is being investigated for rape and denied the allegations.