Times Up!

[Spurminator]

Even if it doesn’t “destroy” Aziz’s career, it’s still incredibly unfair that he got roped into this at all, and that he’ll always have this reputation as a creep when the whole thing should have stayed private. If anybody needs to be doxxed and exposed, it’s this “Grace” who had a ty, disappointing date with a bag and decided to label it secual assault.

I don't really think anything long-term will come of it. I agree it sucks for him but his response was good and he'll be winning awards again next year. What "Grace" and other women like her have learned from this, hopefully, is that you're not going to get universal sympathy for publicly shaming someone over a regretted sexual encounter.

[vy65]

I don't really think anything long-term will come of it. I agree it sucks for him but his response was good and he'll be winning awards again next year. What "Grace" and other women like her have learned from this, hopefully, is that you're not going to get universal sympathy for publicly shaming someone over a regretted sexual encounter.

One problem I have with this is: why didn't the "universal sympathy" realization happen with T.J. Miller?

[Spurminator]

I'm not convinced TJ has suffered long term career damage either. That wasn't nearly as big a story, and he denied it.

But there was also actual violence alleged in his case.

The one I think may have been disproportionately affected is Louis CK. That seemed like kink shaming for the most part.

[vy65]

I agree with your assessment on their respective careers, but the point I thought you were making is that we've reached some watershed moment where society won't tolerate accusers who are primarily out to publicly shame a star. I don't see why that would happen with AA when it didn't happen with TJ Miller given the speciousness of the claims at issue. Nor am I ok with the standard being whether one suffers career damage or not: false accusations are wrong in their own right regardless of whether they cause long term harm or not.

[Spurminator]

Nah I don't think it's a watershed. As long as it generates clicks, unfair career-impacting gossip will continue to spread whether it's Aziz's sexual aggression or Jennifer Lawrence's private photos.

[Splits]

lol sexual aggression

dude had a couple of drinks and tried to get some tang

[Spurminator]

lol sexual aggression

dude had a couple of drinks and tried to get some tang

Sexual aggression isn't necessarily bad. It's part of the game.

[RandomGuy]

The backlash to this story at least proves there is a limit to the MeToo . People know the difference between a sexual assault and a dude just trying too hard to get laid, and they'll speak up if someone is accused of assault incorrectly. Women will think twice before claiming a consensual sexual experience they didn't personally enjoy was assault.

True that.

Personally, I simply trust that women generally have sense enough to pushback against hysteria.

I can't blame women for addressing a long buried problem, or wanting it addressed.
.

[boutons_deux]

Sexual aggression isn't necessarily bad. It's part of the game.

Only if both agree to play,

[rjv]

d) attempts to police acceptable vs. unacceptable sexual behavior. Philosophers like Foucault have written volumes on why that's a bad idea.

At first, the "me too" movement was more focused on direct examples of blatant forms of sexual assault; egregious acts that are indisputably criminal. Since that time, it does appear that there is a different kind of discourse taking place but one that has made many men feel uncomfortable because many males (who would otherwise be what we have usually regarded to be ' bags') aren't so sure of whether or not they fall into this binary cataloguing of assailant/victim. I think what Focault would argue is that if we really want to make any progress on this subject it would necessitate a deeper examination of systematically duplicitous practices. What we are seeing now is an epiphany where women are recognizing internalized patriarchal standards and are reacting against this form of 'power'. Of course, I think most feminists or members of the movement would stay away from Foucault because of his relativistic-and deterministic- traits so they would disagree on point 'd'.

[vy65]

At first, the "me too" movement was more focused on direct examples of blatant forms of sexual assault; egregious acts that are indisputably criminal. Since that time, it does appear that there is a different kind of discourse taking place but one that has made many men feel uncomfortable because many males (who would otherwise be what we have usually regarded to be ' bags') aren't so sure of whether or not they fall into this binary cataloguing of assailant/victim. I think what Focault would argue is that if we really want to make any progress on this subject it would necessitate a deeper examination of systematically duplicitous practices. What we are seeing now is an epiphany where women are recognizing internalized patriarchal standards and are reacting against this form of 'power'. Of course, I think most feminists or members of the movement would stay away from Foucault because of his relativistic-and deterministic- traits so they would disagree on point 'd'.

Reading tea leaves (obviously), but I don't think MF would be at all on board with this. One of the guiding themes of his philosophy was skepticism of sexual liberation; he saw liberation as a transference of power where the individual took over the responsibility for policing one's (sexual) acts from repressive ins utions. I think he'd also be highly suspect of the way in which all these movements merge sexuality with criminality in a repressive way. He'd be critical of the confessional act of hashtagging one's sexual abuse as analogous to a church confession or the psychiatrist's couch. I think, most of all, he'd be highly critical of the really facile way the movement understands sexuality: women are victims, men are aggressors, fight the patriarchy (whatever that is), etc... I think Spurminator put it best: sexual aggression isn't necessarily bad.

These are complicated and nuanced issues. Reducing them to a hashtag is, at best stupid, and at worst really regressive. I agree with you that Foucault would use this as an opportunity to perform yet another genealogy on sexuality. But I have a really hard time thinking he'd be on board with the movement.

[RandomGuy]

Agreed. I think rape and sexual violence are bad things that should be stopped. And I encourage any movement dedicated to stamping that out. Here, however, there is nothing in the "movement," other than one's mere say-so, that enables those involved to separate the "nuts" from those who are reasonable. There's also the added problem that the issues are nuanced and deal with issues that are difficult to define and are going under transformation (i.e., what exactly is a non-verbal cue, what exactly cons utes sexual assault, etc.). That's why I don't agree with Sam Bee: we don't know what exactly cons utes rape, harassment, assault, etc... because the scope of those terms, regrettably, are now up for debate.

And on top of that, you have the issue of conflicting agendas/goals: is it just a matter of combating sexual assault/workplace harassment - or - something broader like re-defining consent or re-defining what cons utes assault.

It is good to hear you acknowledge that there is a fine line to walk. I agree: there is one. However, I don't think that a movement being carried out on social media is particularly adept at walking said fine line. You lose a lot of nuance when you're limited to 240 characters.

That said, I don't know what you mean by petty powerplaying bull , maybe you can elaborate on that, along with what a "re-alingment of norms" entails, whose norms they are, etc...

There's a post-structuralist critique to be made here, but I've leave that to someone else. In any event, this is irrelevant to the points being made above, so I'll leave it be.

Social media campaigns do offer some inherent mechanism for feedback. Nutters with strong opinions will dominate, but the vast majority of people, women in this case, tend to be in the middle bell-curve of common sense-ness.

I think we collectively tend to correct extreme overreaches.

[rjv]

Reading tea leaves (obviously), but I don't think MF would be at all on board with this. One of the guiding themes of his philosophy was skepticism of sexual liberation; he saw liberation as a transference of power where the individual took over the responsibility for policing one's (sexual) acts from repressive ins utions. I think he'd also be highly suspect of the way in which all these movements merge sexuality with criminality in a repressive way. He'd be critical of the confessional act of hashtagging one's sexual abuse as analogous to a church confession or the psychiatrist's couch. I think, most of all, he'd be highly critical of the really facile way the movement understands sexuality: women are victims, men are aggressors, fight the patriarchy (whatever that is), etc... I think Spurminator put it best: sexual aggression isn't necessarily bad.

These are complicated and nuanced issues. Reducing them to a hashtag is, at best stupid, and at worst really regressive. I agree with you that Foucault would use this as an opportunity to perform yet another genealogy on sexuality. But I have a really hard time thinking he'd be on board with the movement.

Yes, I agree on this. One of MF's more agreeable observations (to myself, at least) is that the problem with our revolutions is that they tend to be modeled upon the very same bourgeoisie models that they are opposing which would then lead to one form of unjust power replacing the previous form of unjust power. Some of the #me too movement is falling under this veil; that is, it is acting as if it is a revolutionary process, but it is just recons uting power which is then allowing these systemic injustices to perpetuate themselves in a different form. But, there is a certain human dignity that exists that many women have been denied (and to a much greater extent in other classes, races and countries), and I would agree with someone such as Chomsky (in a manner akin to the argument he posited in his famous debate with MF) that we can strive for a more just social environment. Perhaps I wouldn't go as far as Chomsky, but I would at least propose some form of absurd justice similar to the kind Camus often spoke of, with the caveat that political doctrine can be a dangerous thing.

[vy65]

Yes, I agree on this. One of MF's more agreeable observations (to myself, at least) is that the problem with our revolutions is that they tend to be modeled upon the very same bourgeoisie models that they are opposing which would then lead to one form of unjust power replacing the previous form of unjust power. Some of the #me too movement is falling under this veil; that is, it is acting as if it is a revolutionary process, but it is just recons uting power which is then allowing these systemic injustices to perpetuate themselves in a different form. But, there is a certain human dignity that exists that many women have been denied (and to a much greater extent in other classes, races and countries), and I would agree with someone such as Chomsky (in a manner akin to the argument he posited in his famous debate with MF) that we can strive for a more just social environment. Perhaps I wouldn't go as far as Chomsky, but I would at least propose some form of absurd justice similar to the kind Camus often spoke of, with the caveat that political doctrine can be a dangerous thing.

to much of this. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the net effect of #metoo, but that's because I think Foucault won the debate you're referring to and I've never been a Chomsky fan.

[rjv]

to much of this. I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the net effect of #metoo, but that's because I think Foucault won the debate you're referring to and I've never been a Chomsky fan.

i would have called it a draw. i can't categorically agree with either, thus my deference to camus.

[rjv]

not unsurprisingly, james franco was left out of the best actor nominations despite having been a lock just a month ago. the ramifications of the allegations against him are sure to have affected that nomination bid (especially when you take into account that it appears the Academy rushed to throw Denzel Washington into the category as a 'last minute' subs ute.