"Me Too"

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

While I understand that we have to be wary of analogies now...

When there is an event to raise awareness and funds to battle breast cancer you don't see others say "yeah, but what about testicular cancer?"

#allorbsmatter

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

This is why analogies are often a bad way to contrast a situation.

Your first analogy is a lot more correlative than your second, so I'll tackle that, because the second isn't really worth addressing.

So, if I'm reading you correctly, you believe

an athlete taking a knee in response to systematic oppression by the justice system and being told to do it elsewhere

is equivocal to

a women speaking out in response to systematic issues in the social system, and then a man saying "well what about my issues?" and being told to do it elsewhere

Do you notice the key difference here? Your analogy is only directly comparable if you give the same weight to the anthem as a broad swath of women openly admitting their issues.

Do you believe that these men would be bringing these issues up in a vacuum? Specifically, the kneejerk response of most interjectors to hijack this issue (or say, a thread about this issue) is always less about actually looking for a solution, and more about drowning out the voice of women. How many times have you seen kneejerks complain about Male Rape or Against Male Domestic Abuse? In contrast, how many times have you seen these same men volunteer for or fund initiatives to combat these issues? How many times have they included the plight gay men face regarding these issues?

You read me incorrectly, which suggests you should be less confident in assertions of what is or isn't worthy of dismissal.

Anyways, I'll express my view for others who may read without taking the same approach as you.

I believe that emotional issues can be used to divide as well as to unite. When people choose to take a point of common ground expressed in good will and turn it into something divisive instead of treating it as shared experience upon which to form bonds, I think they're not acting to solve the issue. Common ground, shared experience and allegiances are what realise improvements for the marginalised. If a guy has had a #metoo moment and shares it in good will, that's an opportunity to bond, or an opportunity to be divisive. I'm not moralising. I'm just saying that whatever is right or wrong, meeting a well-intentioned expression of shared experience with a rejection is no way to find common ground, make friends and reach a point of mutual compassion.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

You read me incorrectly, which suggests you should be less confident in assertions of what is or isn't worthy of dismissal.

Anyways, I'll express my view for others who may read without taking the same approach as you.

I believe that emotional issues can be used to divide as well as to unite. When people choose to take a point of common ground expressed in good will and turn it into something divisive instead of treating it as shared experience upon which to form bonds, I think they're not acting to solve the issue. Common ground, shared experience and allegiances are what realise improvements for the marginalised. If a guy has had a #metoo moment and shares it in good will, that's an opportunity to bond, or an opportunity to be divisive. I'm not moralising. I'm just saying that whatever is right or wrong, meeting a well-intentioned expression of shared experience with a rejection is no way to find common ground, make friends and reach a point of mutual compassion.

Can you share an incident of a man sharing a #metoo moment in provable good faith and being rebuffed for it?

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Can you share an incident of a man sharing a #metoo moment in provable good faith and being rebuffed for it?

Well, seeing as the speed of your response suggests you took some real time to consider my point of view and expression, I will certainly dignify your one-liner with response, once.

I have made no claim of this happening. I have only commented on points made in this thread about the appropriateness of when people other than women should engage. I disagreed with what I interpreted both Photon and GGG to be arguing for as those arguments seem to me to support missing opportunities to find common ground.

Your reply clearly missed the mark again.

Anyways, I'll happily engage with either Photon or GGG in discussion as I referenced their arguments previously, but I don't see a productive conversation happening with you Psycnet, so this one is done for me.

[PsYcNeT]

"I only speak in hypotheticals, so I have no counterpoint. Good day sir."

[Cain]

To be honest I haven't followed this intensely, but would suggest that it feels pretty crappy if some people are given the idea that they should "wait their turn" or find "their own time to speak up". Especially given that this is a subject that is notoriously difficult for anyone to bring up when they have fallen victim to it.

Research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) estimates that approximately 1 in 6 boys and 1 in 4 girls are sexually abused before the age of 18. (pulled from a US government site)

Women certainly have their issues and they deserve to be looked at and scrutinized. Just seems shameful to silence people with a very similar experience based on gender.

And again, I haven't been following this much in social media, just browsed through this thread.

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

While I understand that we have to be wary of analogies now...

When there is an event to raise awareness and funds to battle breast cancer you don't see others say "yeah, but what about testicular cancer?"

If a conversation goes like this...

A: "I'm running a marathon to raise money for breast cancer research. I lost my mom to it."

B: "Yeah, I almost lost my father to prostate cancer. I hate cancer."

C: "We're talking about breast cancer now. It's really not the right time to talk about prostate cancer."

...it's pretty obvious that C is the one being callous. Assign whichever genders you want to the three roles.

I'm not even saying an equivalent to this is happening much, as I don't use fb or twitter, nor do I live in N.A., but if it is happening, it's pretty clear to me that an opportunity for bonding is being needlessly missed.

[GirlySports]

i agree with Johnny, we should be able to talk about anything at anytime without the fear of having to tiptoe. In the example above C is selfish. It's a very narcissistic society these days.

And Johnnie is in Shanghai, want to see a place where girls beautiful and materialistic? Just go there

[PepsiFree]

I have still yet to see an actual example of men sharing their story or supporting the movement with their story and being turned down. Can anyone provide an example of where that’s happened here?

The problem with this whole discussion is that without ample evidence of the issue being condemned, it’s seems like a non-issue, which poses the question: “Why is this being brought up?”

Often in response to a social movement groups come out in support, but many also come out with the express purpose of diminishing the movement by making accusations that call into question the moral ground that the movement stands on.

The “movement” is about highlighting the extreme prevalence of sexual harassment against women. Is there place for men in that? Sure. Is there reason for some women to be upset if they feel men are attempting to alter/control their message? Sure. Is there reason for men who clearly are not doing that and just want to share their story to be upset? Sure. But if even one of those side transgressions even remotely comparable to what the issue is about? No, no it’s not.

So it seems disingenuous and suspect when some people and posters come out, outraged over a side issue without providing any evidence that it’s nearly as big as the core issue, and essentially spending their time diminishing and disregarding the core issue while being hyper-focused on their own little cause.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

"The national anthem has two purposes. First is to honour our flag and our country and the second is to pay respect to our troops. Athletes who take a knee during the anthem are out of place because that's not what this time is for, so it's disrespectful."

"The time right after a shooting is no time to discuss gun laws and how those not directly affected in this tragedy are also affected by gun violence. It's an important discussion, but this is clearly not the right time."

By analogy, are these arguments really so different from those offered by GGG and Photon?

Women harassed by Weinstein, women talk about harassment is talking about gun control after a mass shooting.

The flag one again is a little more interesting but again it more reinforces that the male voices intent is disruption. I think that the athletes protesting during the anthem are intentionally trying to amplify their voices through controversy by showing disrespect to a symbol.

So if your assertion through analogy is that the male voices are being amplified by using the #metoo movement that is what I take issue with. The causes and solutions aren't the same so the male discussion does take away from the female discussion.

And that assumes you think that male sharing is genuine. I know my gut reaction is to defend the gender by saying notallmen and womentoo but that is not productive to the discussion that is taking place.

Originally Posted by TheAlpineOracle

I’m in no means putting down the message behind this “me too” campaign but when I see some of my women friends on Facebook basically suggesting they are somewhat morally superior to men, I have to laugh as some of them are no better. Saying men Can’t be part of that campaign is pretty ridiculous. Kind of takes away from the campaign in my opinion.

Social media campaigns have a way of doing that though. Start out as something good, but everyone starts making them about themselves and the original message quickly gets left behind

I don't mean to say you are doing this AO but this post to me is where the reasons for men joining the metoo come from. Women are saying they are morally superior to men so I'm going to show them they are just as bad. And that does not move the conversation forward

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GGG

Women harassed by Weinstein, women talk about harassment is talking about gun control after a mass shooting.

The flag one again is a little more interesting but again it more reinforces that the male voices intent is disruption. I think that the athletes protesting during the anthem are intentionally trying to amplify their voices through controversy by showing disrespect to a symbol.

So if your assertion through analogy is that the male voices are being amplified by using the #metoo movement that is what I take issue with. The causes and solutions aren't the same so the male discussion does take away from the female discussion.

And that assumes you think that male sharing is genuine. I know my gut reaction is to defend the gender by saying notallmen and womentoo but that is not productive to the discussion that is taking place.



I don't mean to say you are doing this AO but this post to me is where the reasons for men joining the metoo come from. Women are saying they are morally superior to men so I'm going to show them they are just as bad. And that does not move the conversation forward

Saying women are just as bad doesn't advance the conversation but all aspects of the issue have to be discussed. Everything from slut-shamming to liberalism.

We should openly discuss someone like Hugh Hefner. Did Playboy objectify or liberate women? Do beauty pageants objectify or liberate women? I'm a beauty pagaent junkie btw, i could tell you who looks better in a dress or who has the best abs wearing a bikini. People have often told me i'm the problem contributing to this. I'm immoral.

It's very complex. Let's open up everything.

[PepsiFree]

All aspects of the issue should be discussed, and everything should be “opened up,” and I don’t think anyone is suggesting the opposite.

The suggestion is that failing to give any focus to the core issue before you run off on a tangent about a side issue is off-putting because it gives the impression you aren’t acknowledging the core issue as important enough to spend any time on.

That’s part of why a movement like all lives matter or a shift to make this about all sexual harassment is suspect, it can say “your issue is not important enough to acknowledge, here’s a better one.” even if that’s not the intention.

[OMG!WTF!]

As a guy with too many metoo hashtags in my past the first thing I thought when I read about this was cool, this is an issue that's front and center right now. What happened to me was years ago and won't ever happen again since I'm grown up and able to punch a lot harder than when I was eight, nine and ten. So obviously this campaign isn't my thing. But it is someone else's thing and it's eminently therapeutic to listen and help other's who've suffered in the same way. That said I don't think it is exclusive to women. I think anyone who feels vulnerable right now has a place speaking up here. I can't picture too many scenarios where an adult guy would feel helpless and harassed or threatened on a regular basis. Prison comes to mind. But if there are, then by all means speak up. If your past is closed, then time to listen and change something.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

You read me incorrectly, which suggests you should be less confident in assertions of what is or isn't worthy of dismissal.

Anyways, I'll express my view for others who may read without taking the same approach as you.

I believe that emotional issues can be used to divide as well as to unite. When people choose to take a point of common ground expressed in good will and turn it into something divisive instead of treating it as shared experience upon which to form bonds, I think they're not acting to solve the issue. Common ground, shared experience and allegiances are what realise improvements for the marginalised. If a guy has had a #metoo moment and shares it in good will, that's an opportunity to bond, or an opportunity to be divisive. I'm not moralising. I'm just saying that whatever is right or wrong, meeting a well-intentioned expression of shared experience with a rejection is no way to find common ground, make friends and reach a point of mutual compassion.

This is a false binary. It's also an opportunity to learn, and an opportunity to pracitce listening and empathy. Maybe you would group this under the category of "bonding."

Think of it similarly to making someone else's Mother's funeral about the loss of your own Mother. Yes, you're coming from a well-intentioned place. Yes your feeling and grief are valid. Yes there is quite obviously a place where you can come together and bond and through shared experience.

However, there is very clearly a line which can be crossed where you're taking someone else's "thing" and making it about yourself and that's not appropriate and is - in and of itself - divisive.

Considering the amount of discourse that has already taken place the challenges that women have had carving out spaces for themselves, and those spaces subsequently being appropriated by men, it is not at all suprising, nor should it be upsetting, that women are defensive of their space. They are deserving of their space and it is an opportunity for men to listen and learn when women declare a space 'theirs.'

The "Me Too" campagin is quite clearly a space for women. That men empathise and have shared experience is - tragically - good. You are right, it IS a way to bond. But the way to bond is not for men to try to enter the space on the same terms or in the same way women do, and it is right to call out men who do try to enter the space on those terms as being inappropriate.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

While I understand that we have to be wary of analogies now...

When there is an event to raise awareness and funds to battle breast cancer you don't see others say "yeah, but what about testicular cancer?"

You're actually on the verge of a very good analogy but just missed it.

It would actually be like like going to the breast cancer awareness event and a male who also had breast cancer coming there and looking for support and awareness.
As male breast cancer is an actual rare disease but only about 1% of breast cancers overall (maybe a similar percentage to male sexual assaults?)

He is then told this is not your time and stop making this about men.

[Tinordi]

Is there a purer representation of the fragile, aggrieved and desperate male ego than reacting to the #metoo campaign with complaints that it's not gender neutral?

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Is there a purer representation of the fragile, aggrieved and desperate male ego than reacting to the #metoo campaign with complaints that it's not gender neutral?

I saw a few men on Twitter share their stories and were treated respectfully. But eventually somebody goes and hijacks these dialogues and makes it a competition.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

Is there a purer representation of the fragile, aggrieved and desperate male ego than reacting to the #metoo campaign with complaints that it's not gender neutral?

We've cultivated a social environment where people gain status by expressing grievance. Is it really surprising that everyone wants to get in on the action?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We've cultivated a social environment where people gain status by expressing grievance. Is it really surprising that everyone wants to get in on the action?

#whataboutme

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

We've cultivated a social environment where people gain status by expressing grievance. Is it really surprising that everyone wants to get in on the action?

Are you suggesting that discussing personal experiences of sexual harassment in this campaign is an attempt to gain status?