Well guys, if any of you are accused of sexual assault, you are 100% fucked. Your career, your life, everything you spent in yourself to get where you are will vanish in an instant. Guilty before innocent mentality in this world, but I guess thats the "progressive" era we live in now.

Still, kinda ironic Hollywood is the place where it started. Maybe they can get the kick in the head they deserve for all the shit they create. Bunch of hypocrities who are getting a good taste of reality.

" Like I said, I agree about your point, I just think it's your tone that's the problem. The only solution to the harassment problem I've heard coming from you so far is victims defending themselves more effectively, but you've pretty much completely ignored the offenders "

we already have laws in place to punish offenders after an incident has occurred... so i'm just going to draw the assumption that your "solution" primarily involves education and as i've said previously people disregard their education routinely to commit selfish acts

but let me not go too far with assuming but i'm curious... how exactly would this education work out? do you like gather all college age men together and sit them down and explain to them that they shouldn't go groping women without verbal consent? i'm just curious about how this would work out

"Let me hear what my strawmans are if you can"

here are a couple:

"" Your point is blatantly incorrect. If we didn't even try to fight crime""

"that you either have only one solution that puts all responsibility on the victims"

"and in fact shown some understanding towards them."

lol... well yeah i try to come at situations trying to be understanding no matter what the context is - that could be for a rapist, a murderer etc etc etc... because if you want to find a solution to a problem they cause you need to understand their perspective...

furthermore the potential to become those things also resides in you and me, i think a lot of people when confronted with these issues forget that last point because they are generally as they say looking for a chance to virtue signal, they don't really have the intent to understand or solve a problem, its simply an opportunity to get on a high horse and claim moral high ground

i mean i totally get why somebody would want to do that since you get the validation of others and all of that... but it doesn't actually solve problems

"Anyway, your warning about going over-the-top with control seem, quite frankly, over-the-top to me. I don't think there's need to come up with any heavy restrictions here, and you haven't said so either, so why do you keep coming up with the idea about too much control and oppressive regimes?"

yes i said that i personally don't see the need to apply measures that are too restrictive, but then again i'm not so stupid or dishonest to push the idea that harassment is something that can be stopped entirely, i also understand the importance of personal responsibility for safety... which now is being thrown aside as victim blaming

the main people agitating for change on issues like this dismiss both ideas and are actively trying to push for a utopia... and i've spoken to some of these people on this very site, to whom, for example, the idea that we can't really guarantee a completely safe society is intolerable

and if you aren't seeing examples of what i just described then i'd say you need to open your eyes

" The wild West was a wonderful thing, no? How about survival of the fittest? Ah, the pillars of civilization, everyone fighting for themself."

civilisation can be considered on both an individual and social level

on the social level we have laws to punish wrong doings and on the individual level we have the ability to take precautions and actions to secure ourselves

i would think it should be obvious that you want to cover both bases since everything cannot be solved at the social level - you don't hire a live-in dentist to brush your teeth for example

"but really any intervention is going to be helpful."

i agree, but i'd say that generally most people do intervene when they see a woman in danger

"that you either have only one solution that puts all responsibility on the victims"

wow... did you not read where i talked about the law? and how harassment is against the law? and i'm the one lacking reading comprehension? are you being serious right now?

"I'd love to hear the other solutions if you have any and be proven wrong about that suspicion."

i don't have any other solutions - to me its a combination of outlawing harmful behavior and individuals taking precautions to make themselves safer... neither solution (social and individual) is perfect and that is because we live in an imperfect world

your other suggested solution is to train people to not be selfish... and you think that's a viable solution

1. Now we're getting somewhere. Yes, we have laws to deal with the offenders, but they're not getting caught and if they are, people stay silent about it. Thus, we need to raise awareness and educate people about the issue. I think I've already stated why I think it helps (several times, possibly) so I'm not going to repeat myself. Besides, awareness and education never hurt. There might be more effective ways as well, but I can't come up with any off the top of my head. I think it's more of a cultural issue anyway, so talking about it should help.

In case it wasn't clear, I wasn't talking about literal education in the sense that you might usually think about education. It's impossible to gather everyone for harassment education, but talking about the situation should also help a lot. Talk about what's acceptable, and don't ignore any wrongdoings. Talk about experiences. Talk about anything related and spread the word when there's a place for it.

2. "Your point is blatantly incorrect. If we didn't even try to fight crime": I don't understand why you think this is a strawman. I said we've largely managed to eliminate problems related to selfishness, to which you responded that crime and oppression do exist. My interpretation is that you refuted my claim that we've largely eliminated said problems because crime and oppression do exist. I still think that's a blatantly incorrect statement. We can largely eliminate a problem, but parts of it might still remain. My remark about not fighting crime was to point out that fighting crime is effective because you seemed to ignore the fact that there is less crime that there would be if we didn't try to fight it.

"that you either have only one solution that puts all responsibility on the victims": You conveniently cut out the part where I provided an alternative (you can even see it from the word 'either' in the quoted part). I believe I can make a strawman out of anything by cutting stuff out of context. Want me to find some strawmans from your posts using this innovative cutting method? Or perhaps you'd prefer some other argumentation errors instead? With proper cutting and taking things out of context, you can convey a completely opposite message, and it's a commonly used tactic.

3. I knew you would hinge onto this minor detail. You ignored the whole point of that paragraph and focused on one minor detail that bears no importance on its own. Yes, you can and you should understand the offenders. My remark was to provide context as to why I think your tone is not helpful. Have you ever considered why pedophiles do what they do? I have, and it's really sad - and not only from the victims' perspective. I'd say that's a pretty good example of me trying to understand different perspectives.

Also, I'm not looking for validation. There's no validation for defending the wronged on this site. I'd go to ResetEra or something like that if I wanted validation for this stuff, but their closed-mindedness is exactly the reason why I don't entirely feel at home there either. This was yet another misinterpretation of my motives from you.

4. Well, I don't think it can be stopped completely either. I also said I understand your point about victims defending themselves, and I even said I agree about it. I don't know why you still think you have to keep telling me this. I'm not in the typical feminist-SJW camp or whatever you want to call it, and I'll never be there unless that camp changes despite me sharing many of their objectives. I'm in my own camp, trying to make sense of things and be reasonable. You open your eyes and start reading my posts and not assuming anything about my motives.

Also, I still don't understand why you think heavy restrictions and oppressive regimes have anything to do with preventing sexual harassment in practice, at least in our conversation. I don't think I've given a single reason (even a far-fetched one) to bring them in this discussion.

5. You're still dancing around the whole oppressive regimes theme, I think. And you still haven't explained why you fear fighting harassment on a social level would require anything that could cause problems.

6. Judging by what I've read, this is not the case - which is a huge part of the problem. Of course many people do intervene, but it sounds like it's too common to ignore harassment, for one reason or another. Increasing intervention rates ought to be an effective way to fight harassment, and it shouldn't require any hard measures to pull off. I imagine education and raising awareness are the main keys to increasing intervention rates.

7. Like you said: the laws are already there. I thought it was obvious I'm talking about improving the situation. Existing laws aren't going to change the situation. Or do you perhaps have in mind some new legislation that could improve the situation?

8. You're still talking about legislation and individual responsibility. You don't think it's possible to do anything that might help enough on a social level between legal and individual levels? Also, I haven't suggested we teach people to not be selfish - that's not going to happen. But education and raising awareness might help people remember how they should behave (both to act morally and to not risk getting caught by doing something illegal), it might help the victims in seeking justice, and it might help in intervention. There's probably other good sides too.

"Yes, we have laws to deal with the offenders, but they're not getting caught and if they are, people stay silent about it."

isn't there like a list for sex offenders?

yes many aren't caught especially because of the private nature of the problem, which is why individual empowerment and responsibility is crucial

" I think it's more of a cultural issue anyway"

rape culture?

""Your point is blatantly incorrect. If we didn't even try to fight crime": I don't understand why you think this is a strawman"

because i didn't state explicitly or implicitly that we should not fight crime

"I said we've largely managed to eliminate problems related to selfishness"

and you're wrong and acknowledge that you are wrong when you talk about all of the sex offenders that get away with it... i mean good grief even up above you suggest that our culture is lenient towards harassers, not that i even really agree with that point but it shows that you're contradicting yourself

"you seemed to ignore the fact that there is less crime that there would be if we didn't try to fight it."

and sexual harassment is against the law... so what is your point exactly?.... this is a crime that IS fought

""that you either have only one solution that puts all responsibility on the victims": You conveniently cut out the part where I provided an alternative"

the rest of your post doesn't change the fact that its a strawman since you are saying that i'm saying that i want to put all responsibility on potential victims

"I knew you would hinge onto this minor detail. You ignored the whole point of that paragraph and focused on one minor detail that bears no importance on its own."

here is the paragraph in its entirety

"Like I said, I agree about your point, I just think it's your tone that's the problem. The only solution to the harassment problem I've heard coming from you so far is victims defending themselves more effectively, but you've pretty much completely ignored the offenders and in fact shown some understanding towards them."

you stated that last part as if i should not try to understand their perspective... which obviously if you are trying to solve a problem caused by them is necessary... and that's why i gave my response

"Also, I'm not looking for validation."

i didn't say you were... that comment tbh was more towards the type of person who runs into a thread looking for a boogieman to call a name so they can supposedly feel good about themselves for striking back at someone they imagine is their enemy

"There's no validation for defending the wronged on this site"

nonsense, the pursuit of protecting victims is something everyone here generally agrees with and there is a validating effect that comes with that... and that's not necessarily a bad thing, but if taken too far it narrows a person's perspective too much

" you still haven't explained why you fear fighting harassment on a social level would require anything that could cause problems."

i've addressed this already and its just getting tedious to address something that should be obvious

i mean all i can really say is that the fact that you call an increased emphasis on personal responsibility "victim blaming" is a sign of a problem because it means that the problem must be solved at a social level

but... we already have a social solution called the law... so, what therefore do we do?... we've gotten to this point before and you can't give a proper answer

one way that we could address the problem is to at a social level place greater restrictions on human interaction and that is how things can become oppressive

"Of course many people do intervene, but it sounds like it's too common to ignore harassment, for one reason or another."

yes and you think that way again because you're trying to reduce a complex problem down to being a simple black and white situation

-couples often get into fights out in public and argue over different issues, does that give some random person who doesn't understand the context of their arguing to intervene?

-people are sometimes receptive to being groped or spoken to sexually out in public

-why should anyone be required to put themselves on the line to endanger themselves in this way?

-generally assault occurs in private on a one on one basis so regardless even if we adopt the principle that intervention should always happen no matter what, its not really a viable solution anyway

and tbh i'm curious about you on a personal level, lets say you witness some construction worker yelling at a passing woman "nice tits" or whatever, are you now going to run up and accost that guy to straighten him out?

"Existing laws aren't going to change the situation."

true just like laws can't stop murder which i'd say is a more serious problem

"But education and raising awareness might help people remember how they should behave (both to act morally and to not risk getting caught by doing something illegal)"

i had a long discussion in another thread recently where i raised the idea that morals need to have an objective standard associated with them so that society doesn't descend into chaos... can you guess what happened?

what do you think religion is? what is happening to religion now?

I feel crowd mentality is a massive influence on all these admissions coming out now. After Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey was accused, there was a significant uptick in the amount of people being accused. I believe the men who have been accused thus far do have some shred of guilt... but I fear that we will see a rise of some form of McCarthyism by a few choice individuals.

1. At least not a public one here, but I think there is in the US. Anyway, doesn't seem like a universal thing, and such a list isn't really related to what I said because it's relevant only for offenders that get caught and convicted. I agree about your latter paragraph, but it's not sufficient because not all of it is that private (e.g. workplace harassment).

2. To be honest, at the moment I'm not even sure what exactly the term means. It gets thrown around a lot, that's for sure. I'm talking more people not talking about the issue (until recently) and perhaps not doing much to fight it - that kind of stuff. I guess there's also the issue with harassment being seen as more acceptable than it should be, which I guess is more closely related to this 'rape culture', but I think there's more to it than just that like I said.

3. It was there for demonstration purposes. I did not imply you thought we should not fight crime, nor did I think so.

4. In many other regards ffs! Theft, for example, would certainly be ridiculously common compared to the actual situation if we hadn't been able to eliminate much of it.

5. I'm not sure what your point is here.

6. That's literally what I'm providing an alternative for in the part you cut out. I suggest you get some reading comprehension ASAP. Look, I can do some cutting too! You said this: "i want to put all responsibility on potential victims". And it seems the rest of your text that I conveniently cut out doesn't really change what you're saying here where I'm quoting it, so whoa there, evil dude!

7. You still ignored my point. The sentence you highlighted exists there only to support my argument that your tone is the problem. It's a part of the paragraph for a reason. I'm starting to think there's something funny going on with your reading comprehension because there's been many cases where you seem to have lacked it.

8. If you didn't, I don't see why you thought it was necessary to bring it up at all. Bringing it up seems disconnected from our discussion.

9. As far as I've seen, there's surprisingly many people on this site that don't always see things that way. In this thread, there seems to be a general consensus, but in many others, not so much.

10. I think you still don't get it. There's definitely a social level between law and individuals that has room for improvement. It's the same level that forces people to resign when there's a public outcry about something. It's not because of laws, and it's not because of certain individuals - it's because there's something between those two levels.

11. No, it's you who is overcomplicating matters. I think I see the grey areas perfectly well, which makes this yet another misinterpretation on your part.

12. Maybe in some cases, and probably not in many other cases. If the behaviour of either party can be seen as threatening (as opposed to just being aggressive, as is common in arguing), intervention is a justified choice.

13. And probably more often than not, they aren't. Context is the key. If someone gropes another person at work and they aren't together and the reaction isn't very clearly happy, you would almost certainly do well to intervene. At worst, you get told you misinterpreted the situation, but the most likely scenario is that you intervened sexual harassment. Overall, if you read the context, inaction is likely to cause more harm than unnecessary action.

14. Because there's rarely any danger and you'll probably end up helping someone. That said, I don't think anyone should be 'required' to do this - 'encourage' is the word I would rather use.

15. I agree, but there are cases where intervention is possible.

16. Of course not. However, if the situation continues and the victim isn't exactly comfortable with it, I might do something about it.

17. Ah, you found a way to diminish the harassment problem. Other than that, it's good that we seem to have found a point we agree about.

18. An objective standard, such as the Bible perhaps? If so, objectivity is debatable.

19. Religion is what it is. I don't know what you'd like me to tell about it. The role of religion seems to be diminishing in developed countries, or at least western countries. I'm not sure what the situation is in the rest of the world. Your point? This seems very loosely related to our discussion.

Why don't you just do fist bumps?  Actually the safest way of not catching any cooties.

Add another one to the list?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/eight-women-say-charlie-rose-sexually-harassed-them--with-nudity-groping-and-lewd-calls/2017/11/20/9b168de8-caec-11e7-8321-481fd63f174d_story.html

Charlie Rose