[RD] Why Men Need to be Involved in the #MeToo Movement

[TheMeInTeam]

I always find it weird when people apply "due process" to like, their opinions of rape and assault allegations. You ain't a judge, and innocent until proven guilty is a procedural standard for conducting criminal justice. It's not a guideline for how you should form opinions.

Public allegations have a real effect on the livelihood of the accused, regardless of whether the evidence supports them. That is not a matter of opinion.

I guess we could start seeing libel counter-claims.

 

[Farm Boy]

that it is better to just be religious minds and to listen and believe anything we hear from a specific class of people

It's offtopic, but it's almost certain you still haven't grasped the difference between religious and dogmatic if you're yet typing this. I thought it relevant in light of the point you are attempting to make.

 

[inthesomeday]

See, that's what I mean. I ask a question, and what I get back is a shotgun blast of incoherent nonsense right into my face.

I literally have no recourse other than make a dumb joke about it, because a discussion is predestined to not lead anywhere, given that what you wrote there is so detached from reality, Shyamalan could make a movie about it and people would praise him for being imaginative with his horror fantasies.

FEMINIST REKT BY SUPERIOR LOGIC

I do not. I trust social media less.

What does this mean? What is social media but a platform for people to express themselves? Do you mean to say you trust the people less? Because then we’ve found your problem.

That does not justify punishing falsely accused in any capacity.

Not at all. What it does justify is listening to accusers first and foremost when they make accusations, because people who are raped literally being afraid to report it shows a problem in our society and culture with victim suppression and blame.

People being afraid they won’t be believed is demonstrably a bigger problem than people making false accusations, is what it shows, meaning there’s much more value in our solidarity with victims than our... whatever it is you’re arguing.

This isn't a small crime, there's not a lot worse aside from murder and arguably some extreme forms of torture.

Are you referring to false accusation? Because if you are then you and I have very different concepts of value. But then we already knew that so I don’t know why I keep replying to you.

These need to be reported, to law enforcement, ASAP.

Ah yes, the objective and justice-serving police force.

Saying falsely accused should suffer as a response to reporting frequency problem is absurd.

Is that how you’ve chosen to interpret what I’ve said? That’s pretty silly.

That's pretty ironic, considering you're essentially advocating to eschew evidence based convictions in favor of social media dogpiling people regardless of how much evidence exists against them.

Ah, I am not in the slightest advocating that!

 

[Lexicus]

This is simply out of frustration. It shows mistrust in the victim to hear “both sides of the testimony”. There is only one side to a victim-oppressor relationship. If a kid told you his dad was beating him hopefully you wouldn’t listen to the dad about it?

So can you explain how this logic does not lead to conviction by accusation? If a kid told me his dad was beating him I would certainly try to establish the facts of the situation before, say, taking custody of the kid away from the dad.

I always find it weird when people apply "due process" to like, their opinions of rape and assault allegations. You ain't a judge, and innocent until proven guilty is a procedural standard for conducting criminal justice. It's not a guideline for how you should form opinions.

I second this.

 

[inthesomeday]

So can you explain how this logic does not lead to conviction by accusation? If a kid told me his dad was beating him I would certainly try to establish the facts of the situation before, say, taking custody of the kid away from the dad.

What exactly does “establish the facts” mean here? My point with this comparison is that there are situations where an accusation should be treated as the first bit of evidence itself.

 

[Lexicus]

What exactly does “establish the facts” mean here? My point with this comparison is that there are situations where an accusation should be treated as the first bit of evidence itself.

What do you think "establish the facts" means? It seems a pretty self-explanatory phrase to me. Do you think that an accusation is enough evidence to convict in the absence of other evidence?

Here's an example. When I was 11 or 12 my younger brother (who was 5 or 6 at the time) mentioned to the school counselor that our parents "hit us." Our parents did occasionally go upside our heads when we were being particularly stupid, but they absolutely didn't "beat" us. The school called me and my other brother in to talk about it and we both told them that the first brother was prone to exaggeration and that our parents certainly weren't physically abusing us. They didn't send CPS to the house to take us away, because rather than taking my brother's accusation at face value (or reading into it that our parents were savagely beating us) they took time to establish the facts.

 

[uppi]

I was reading the morning news feed today, and I came across a couple of articles about the #MeToo movement and "Toxic Masculinity". There have been a number of research projects by sociologists and psychologists designed to study what it is like to be a man. Specifically, what it is like to be a man in 2017-2018. It turns out that many men have the same insecurities, needs and desires as women do, which has surprised a number of researchers.

I understand the science behind this, but I cannot truly understand what it is like to be a man in this day and age because I can't walk a mile in his shoes. Many men are feeling attacked by the #MeToo movement, which just adds to their newly discovered insecurities. Others are actively fighting against it. Still others don't care. I, myself, disagree with some of the movement as it denies men due process once accused. I firmly believe in the presumption of innocence, and you just can't get that when you are accused of sexual impropriety on Facebook.

An interesting thought experiment would be for you to ask yourself what you would think of the term "Toxic Femininity".

On the one hand I understand and I have observed that there can be such a thing as Toxic Masculinity. On the other hand, the term seems to somewhat imply that masculinity itself is a bad thing that needs to be avoided. Instinctively, I consider that as an attack on myself, no matter the facts and whether that was intended or not. Depending on the mood, this evokes different emotional reactions:
- defensiveness and contrarian argumentation: I am compelled to put into question every argument and try to poke holes into them wherever possible
- aggressiveness: How dare they to attack me, I will show them what they mess with
- indifference: They don't seem to be interested in having me on my side so why should I care?
On rational reflection, none of these lead to a constructive discussion and I am glad that most of the time I can avoid acting on these emotions, but I cannot deny they are there.

 

[Narz]

Masculinity isn't toxic. Men who commit violence and sexual assault lack masculinity (confidence, authority, positive relationships with the opposite sex and positive male role models).

Some people do bad things, trying to get all men to feel responsible for rapists is like being a racist cuz some black kids beat you up as a child.

 

[Arwon]

Public allegations have a real effect on the livelihood of the accused, regardless of whether the evidence supports them. That is not a matter of opinion.

I guess we could start seeing libel counter-claims.

The thing is, *actually false* accusations of sexual assault just aren't very common and the idea that they are is a pernicious myth. And by the time accusations are deemed credible enough by serious news outlets, they've been filtered by editorial judgement and legal scrutiny.

In Australia especially, overly sensitive defamation law has had a massive detrimental effect on the ability of victims and media to report nearly anything.

Right now, a major effort by a group of journalists at our public broadcaster (the ABC), a major newspaper, and their respective legal teams, has collected at least 70 names of allegedly abusive public figures and over 400 specific allegations (probably many more now, this was just the list they had before their first story, about a celebrity gardener), and have so far over serveral months gone public with only a small handful. It is slow, difficult, meticulous work to navigate the legal terrain, the actual evidence and stories, and victim welfare abd consent to report, in order to run these sorts of story.

The valid concern just isn't that the public discussion of awful behaviour might have a bad impact on the people who behaved awfully. The real worry is that people continue to be silenced and powerful abusers continue to be protected by that silence.

 

[Lexicus]

On the other hand, the term seems to somewhat imply that masculinity itself is a bad thing that needs to be avoided.

To the extent that masculinity is about acting out violent domination, it is a bad thing that needs to be avoided. It's incumbent on men to determine what masculinity is to mean, if it doesn't mean something toxic.

 

[Narz]

The thing is, *actually false* accusations of special assault just aren't very common.

In family court you can make all sorts of accusations without evidence. In criminal court it's harder to get away with a false claim.

 

[Lexicus]

In family court you can make all sorts of accusations without evidence.

That's a distortion. Civil court uses a "preponderance of evidence" standard, rather than a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.

 

[Narz]

That's a distortion. Civil court uses a "preponderance of evidence" standard, rather than a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard.

No at all. It's basically he-said, she-said. Sometimes there is no evidence and the judge just has to make a judgement.

 

[warpus]

I always find it weird when people apply "due process" to like, their opinions of rape and assault allegations. You ain't a judge, and innocent until proven guilty is a procedural standard for conducting criminal justice. It's not a guideline for how you should form opinions.

From my experience when people say "Due process should be followed here" they mean that the accuser shouldn't be crucified and have his/her career ruined before a court hears the case and all the facts which we might or might not be privy to.

I totally agree that when somebody says "I was raped", the person should be accommodated and helped, listened to, and whatever else they might need, without any mention of "due process". I suspect the vast majority of people citing "due process" don't think the person shouldn't be helped before a verdict is read out in court

 

[inthesomeday]

What do you think "establish the facts" means? It seems a pretty self-explanatory phrase to me. Do you think that an accusation is enough evidence to convict in the absence of other evidence?

Well since I’m talking to you I feel comfortable coming out and saying I don’t like the concept of courts altogether, or convictions that go with them, and that I think mob justice is the only form of moral justice. So I guess sometimes, but it doesn’t really matter.

Here's an example. When I was 11 or 12 my younger brother (who was 5 or 6 at the time) mentioned to the school counselor that our parents "hit us." Our parents did occasionally go upside our heads when we were being particularly stupid, but they absolutely didn't "beat" us.

Oh. I’m so sorry, it’s never okay for parents to hit children. It’s a very good thing your brother said something.

The school called me and my other brother in to talk about it and we both told them that the first brother was prone to exaggeration and that our parents certainly weren't physically abusing us.

Well... they were, if they were hitting you.

They didn't send CPS to the house to take us away,

Well that’s good, CPS is one of the most racist and classist organizations in American government today, and that’s really saying something.

because rather than taking my brother's accusation at face value (or reading into it that our parents were savagely beating us) they took time to establish the facts.

Hm, okay. I think you honestly chose a terrible example because in this situation your parents WERE hitting you, you just said so yourself, and so they were literally guilty of exactly what your brother (the accusing victim without evidence) said they were, and ultimately nothing was done about it because the authority your brother told (naturally, as authorities do) did nothing about it.

 

[Lexicus]

I think mob justice is the only form of moral justice.

What does this mean?

Well... they were, if they were hitting you.

Somehow I feel like I'm a better judge of this than you?

Hm, okay. I think you honestly chose a terrible example because in this situation your parents WERE hitting you, you just said so yourself, and so they were literally guilty of exactly what your brother (the accusing victim without evidence) said they were, and ultimately nothing was done about it because the authority your brother told (naturally, as authorities do) did nothing about it.

So tell me, what do you think should have been done about it? CPS taking us away from them is clearly off the table since CPS is too "racist and classist", so what do you think the appropriate course of action would have been?

 

[inthesomeday]

What does this mean?

Courts become corrupt, democracy is moral, mobs are democratic

Somehow I feel like I'm a better judge of this than you?

But you just said they hit you.

So tell me, what do you think should have been done about it? CPS taking us away from them is clearly off the table since CPS is too "racist and classist", so what do you think the appropriate course of action would have been?

Family counseling. If it was severe enough, community liberation of the child.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

An interesting thought experiment would be for you to ask yourself what you would think of the term "Toxic Femininity".

There certainly is "Toxic Femininity" out there. Attend any radical feminist gathering for prime examples. I'm perfectly aware that there are toxic individuals on both sides.

Note that I didn't coin or use the term "Toxic Masculinity", I merely linked and article which erroneously used that term in its web link. The article linked is not called that at all.

@inthesomeday : You have a very different take on the situation, but I can't say that I agree with any of it. You're advocating for almost complete anarchy. I'm firm in the belief that no one should ever have their life ruined by an accusation that cannot be conclusively proven, and also, no one should have their lives destroyed by an accusation alone. I can't support your position.

 

[Hygro]

What does this mean?

He means that when a black kid smirks at a white woman, justice is the burning of the black kid.

 

[Arwon]

From my experience when people say "Due process should be followed here" they mean that the accuser shouldn't be crucified and have his/her career ruined before a court hears the case and all the facts which we might or might not be privy to.

I totally agree that when somebody says "I was raped", the person should be accommodated and helped, listened to, and whatever else they might need, without any mention of "due process". I suspect the vast majority of people citing "due process" don't think the person shouldn't be helped before a verdict is read out in court

Whereas in my experience the people getting high on the self congratulatory magnitude of their own sheer objective rationalism by invoking courtroom metaphors to describe their own opinions tend towards asking stupid things.

Things like "why didn't you report it back then" or "why didn't you fight" or "you just want to profit" or "you just want to ruin their life". Ya know, the sorta thing that reveals way more about the ignorance of whichever Captain Logic is "just asking questions" and "hearing both sides" than the person who they're interrogating.