Jaysus, the amount of energy people are expensing in intellectualising this issue. The mind boggles.
Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc
- Thread starter Buchan
- Start date
Oh yeah I don't disagree at all. I just am not very optimistic about any potential findings. We have an instinct in us that loves power. Looking at history, men tend to have that more which of course brings up that old age question of nature and nurture. The answer is pretty simple for me really; we need to ensure people never get that much power and leeway. We need to lessen how hierarchical our interactions are so that no one ends up in that position. One small hitch there, this is strictly linked to wealth and money, the number one drug and cause for evil and people who are wealthy and rich tend to want it to stay that way and they are already too powerful to ensure it stays that way. It makes a vicious cycle. In the case of sexual abuse, we can try to ensure there are more women in positions of power, it's already so much better now compared to how it was a couple of decades ago.
You can intellectualise every single issue there. In fact it is better to approach from an intellectual angle than any other. Other angles are usually an exercise in emotional venting and moral one upping that usually leads nowhere.
I don't see the point in intellectualising beyond a certain point tbh. Not when the issue is so widespread and crippling to the opposite sex. How exactly does talk of power, human nature, society and all that bollocks help them? the best and quickest way to solve the issue is to implement stricter rules and make it easier for women in workplaces to speak out against harassment.
To me, explaining societies mainly from anthropology leads to all kinds of fallacies, especially when trying to explain social change. I think it gets even clearer when applying your argument to the issue of 'race':
According to this logic, in earlier periods of modern Western history, white people must have been naturally equipped with power instincts to a much stronger degree, while in the more recent decades the nature of non-white people somehow changed, making them more power-hungry, which caused the former prevalence of white people's power to give way to more equitable societies and culture. The same can be played through for the changes in gender relations or all other examples of social emancipation. It never makes any sense.
So I'd say it's much more reasonable to assume that economic, political, cultural circumstances have changed to a point where the established social balance has been tipped, enabling people to take social avenues that were blocked before.
But it's all about the context. If we are in a position where we can actually make legislation and implement regulations, obviously intellectualising an issue is a waste of time as it helps no one. We are not however, we are not helping anyone whatever we write on this forum. Every issue has those two sides to them, terrorism, sexual abuse, criminality, etc ... the side where immediate action or regulation is needed to affect positive change in the here now but they also need to studied on a grand scale to diagnose the heart of those issues as is the only way to affect long lasting change that has a more solid foundation. We are in no position for the former, nor should we be without qualification. We can at least give the latter a go.
I think I either failed to make my point or you misunderstood me. I don't think in those terms at all that everything can be explained from an anthropological point of view. My point is that it's difficult to tell which is and which is not as there is a lot of overlap. Philosophers and thinkers have been addressing this question since the beginning of time, I don't think we are any closer to those answers. My point is culture is just a consequence of a grand mix of economical, financial, anthropological factors and it is just impossible to gauge to which extent each of these factors make an impact. In the case of men and women, this is even more difficult as throughout human history, we were always patriarchal whereas when it comes race to have maybe more evidence of a variety in terms of who is in charge and in control. That does not necessarily mean that one is more nature over nurture or vice versa, just that culture can more often than not be the consequence instead of the instigator.
Okay, then our disagreement isn't that huge. I thought reading posts #1928 & #1932 combined, you made a pretty definite statement in that regard:
With your characterisation of culture in this post now I can certainly agree at large, also with seeing a dialectical relationship between human nature and society. The weight we give to each side still seems to be different, though. I'm also more confident that the role all these different factors play in human society can be rationally examined and understood, but that's another question.
So to get back to the thread discussion of the last few pages, I actually think that 'culture' has been the exact missing link in many posts there. Imo, it can solve the question 'is this about power or men?', by explaining why this mustn't be seen as a contradiction, historically.
Last edited:
You are not wrong to reach that interpretation from my posts because I do indeed come across more definitive in some of them. The reason is that I genuinely thing it is a mystery to gauge the extent of those influences and how culture is affects and is affected by the other factors. As I wrote before, thinkers have been debating those questions forever so I am not buying that there is anyone who has any answers here, it is such a difficult question that we might actually never know the answer to. I think however that you are right in that I am not that confident in analysing these issues rationally. I even think sometimes that it is more likely that we switch roles with women, homosexuals, and other groups that have been bullied throughout history, with them taking charge and subjecting their bullies to the same treatment for a good amount of time, than us all actually living in harmony and without the kind of hierarchy that produces abuse. It is like that Louis CK bit (yes I am aware of the irony) where he talks about there will be a day where black people get payback for slavery and "we will have totally deserved it". I find that form of fairness more likely achievable than us ever reaching a level of actual equality. I suppose this means anthropological reasons in the sense of who is destined for power are less of a factor but are more valid in the sense of wanting power and abusing it.
I just highlighted that part because it is so eloquently put and agree with it completely. The two are interlinked but as usual, linguistics can be very tricky as I am sure most agree with that point but they wouldn't necessarily put it in that way.
@Theonas
As a last reply, I noticed there's a crucial half-sentence missing in the statement you put in bold: Understanding the role of culture can solve this false contradiction without promoting an essentialist understanding of what masculinity is (à la "striving for power/dominance is the nature of men").
Just to clarify, because I guess that sentence could be misinterpreted otherwise.
As a last reply, I noticed there's a crucial half-sentence missing in the statement you put in bold: Understanding the role of culture can solve this false contradiction without promoting an essentialist understanding of what masculinity is (à la "striving for power/dominance is the nature of men").
Just to clarify, because I guess that sentence could be misinterpreted otherwise.
Anthony Bourdain feels 'guilty as f--k' over Mario Batali: 'I’ve been sitting on stories that were not mine to tell'
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/anthony-bourdain-feels-apos-guilty-151942837.html
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/12/11/cat-person
you should all read this incredible short story. and then read the twitter feed below after
https://twitter.com/MenCatPerson
you should all read this incredible short story. and then read the twitter feed below after
https://twitter.com/MenCatPerson
That's a piece of great writing.
Last edited:
An interesting piece of writing - for me it seemed to suggest a divide between the sexes on how we see consent. For the women it was a fluid and ongoing process of consent / doubt and attraction whilst the Man sees consent as a single portal - once you have agreed to x - y is ok too.
I suppose that is often the case and would explain a lot of negative Male behaviour - maybe more men need to see consent as an ongoing process.
Agree. She also felt pressure into that way idea, that to stop after a certain point would be too embarrassing and too hurtful to the man, so it's better to just go ahead with it, which seems a awful pressure to deal with. Also I thought it was good at showing the sort of reaction to low self esteem(Although of course this a huge generalisation and clearly doesn't apply to everyone), that her reaction was to turn to self doubt/self criticism and it seems a little bit of fear, where the reaction from the man(Although we didn't get to hear his own thoughts)had at least some anger and lashing out - him calling her a whore(A man in his 30's essential acting like a child in the school playground, being mean to the girl he liked).
Yep that's a great interpretation to be fair.
As a woman, my thought process could immediately go from being up for it while we're at dinner/netflixing or whatever, to it then developing into 'i guess this is fine' while we're in the first stages of making out/fondling, to 'i'm not really up for this anymore' - and it's not necessarily that the guy has done anything wrong, it could be a mix of hormones, or insecurity, or even shame or guilt that just kicks in and changes your mood.
But once your mind starts to change that's also when you start to be mindful that if you reject a guy after the first initial stages you're unsure of how he'll react. He could get violent, angry or aggressive, and you could be naked and completely vulnerable, so you prefer to just keep going, as if it's an obligation rather than face the uncertainty of the alternative option.
It's a tricky situation, I think a lot of it would be helped with better communication between both parties, and also during the process too.
Is that based on a real encounter or a fictional write up?
Article is ok, reads like a diary of a college going girl. I think the consent issue is interesting. I actually do agree that men in general see consent as black and white issue and are prone to throwing strops if the girl changes her mind mid way but despite the stalkery behaviour at the end, nothing in the article suggested that the man would have forced her to have sex if she had verbally chosen to end intercourse at any point. The reason she gives to not do the same, point towards sex not being put a premium for the current generation, so as to it almost seems easier to have a bad intercourse with someone than face the awkwardness or embrassement of having to end it. The description of the intercourse itself seemed like an example of excessive porn watching significantly altering one's sexual behaviour and expectations.
The section about ghosting was interesting before being undercut by the ending which seemed to justify it. I myself ghosted a couple of girls I met at different points in my life and know how easy it is to fall into that trap, where you think you will write something just the next hour, day etc before it is already too late to say anything and you coward into not saying anything at all. It was very aptly and accurately depicted in the article.
Response to the article has been sexist but it is a two way street. There are always multiple arguments at play in an issue. Curbing body-shaming of women is an important issue but it also needs to ok for women to acknowledge their own sexual needs and fantasize or sexualize men bodies. Even though men no where near have it as bad as women when it comes to being judged on their appearance, it is a valid point to state that an article depicting female behavior in the same manner narrated by a male would not have been well received at all. Which is probably fine to an extent given the different in statuses and expectations from two sexes but nonetheless is a true statement IMO.
Article is ok, reads like a diary of a college going girl. I think the consent issue is interesting. I actually do agree that men in general see consent as black and white issue and are prone to throwing strops if the girl changes her mind mid way but despite the stalkery behaviour at the end, nothing in the article suggested that the man would have forced her to have sex if she had verbally chosen to end intercourse at any point. The reason she gives to not do the same, point towards sex not being put a premium for the current generation, so as to it almost seems easier to have a bad intercourse with someone than face the awkwardness or embrassement of having to end it. The description of the intercourse itself seemed like an example of excessive porn watching significantly altering one's sexual behaviour and expectations.
The section about ghosting was interesting before being undercut by the ending which seemed to justify it. I myself ghosted a couple of girls I met at different points in my life and know how easy it is to fall into that trap, where you think you will write something just the next hour, day etc before it is already too late to say anything and you coward into not saying anything at all. It was very aptly and accurately depicted in the article.
Response to the article has been sexist but it is a two way street. There are always multiple arguments at play in an issue. Curbing body-shaming of women is an important issue but it also needs to ok for women to acknowledge their own sexual needs and fantasize or sexualize men bodies. Even though men no where near have it as bad as women when it comes to being judged on their appearance, it is a valid point to state that an article depicting female behavior in the same manner narrated by a male would not have been well received at all. Which is probably fine to an extent given the different in statuses and expectations from two sexes but nonetheless is a true statement IMO.
It's fictional but the writer based it off someone she knew.
Yes just read it, she actually based it off her own encounter with someone she met online.
A good article over the whole consent/bad sex issue. I think i agree with almost everything written here - https://elladawson.com/2017/12/09/bad-sex-or-the-sex-we-dont-want-but-have-anyway/
He put out a statement
Ryan Lizza said:
Sucks as he was really good at reporting the white house.
So about these allegations, have any women formally sued or initiated legal proceedings against the celebrity perp's?
I keep reading these allegations but no punishments per se being discussed. I presume that just quitting their position or public apology does not suffice.
I keep reading these allegations but no punishments per se being discussed. I presume that just quitting their position or public apology does not suffice.
Yes i can see how that would be difficult issue - particularly if alcohol is involved -A a married man i know it can be frustrating to stop mid-stream but i prefer that than the alternative. Communication is the key and also perhaps for Men to enjoy the journey rather than obsess about the "destination" shall we say.
So did anyone see "I love you, daddy" then? It's out there.
It's actually quite sick knowing what we know now. Louis is clearly projecting, especially in the first part of the film. His character even moralises to the daughter about feminism in one scene. Then you have Charlie doing the wank in front of Edie Falco as well..
It's actually quite sick knowing what we know now. Louis is clearly projecting, especially in the first part of the film. His character even moralises to the daughter about feminism in one scene. Then you have Charlie doing the wank in front of Edie Falco as well..
Ah thanks.
That was a good and interesting read. Something similar coming from a man perspective(Although it's a good few years old now)
I'm not sure you'd see it as such an incredible story if a man had written said story talking about how he led on a woman he wasn't really that interested in, imagined verbally degrading that woman with a future girlfriend for what she lacked, laughed at the fact she was worthy to be 'his first', talked about how revolting she looked and how pathetic she was in bed, mocked her choice of movie, assumed everything she did was done to impress him and then mock her when she's having a drink by herself after they broke up. Oh and ofcourse while he wasn't aroused himself he mocked her for not being aroused.
If that was a bloke we'd assume it was The Donald, but to be fair even he isn't really that deluded or up himself as this woman who seemingly adjusted the story of her internet date where she was probably much older than '20'.
What a completely asinine comment that does the disservice of equating rape victims to self important drama queens. And no there isn't a divide between the genders, more women than men would consider to consent be given in this scenario. She provided consent throughout by continuing to consent without her partner stating otherwise. She merely had bad sex as did the man who lost his erection. But according to her narative she was the victim of his ill will while he simply wasn't a man for her not turning him on.
The Spotted Pig Restaurant in New York Had 'Rape Room' Where Ken Friedman and Chef Mario Batali Are Accused Of Assault
https://www.yahoo.com/news/spotted-pig-restaurant-york-had-230623918.html
https://www.yahoo.com/news/spotted-pig-restaurant-york-had-230623918.html
Everything you're angry about here springs from your interpretation of the story.
It's not a story about how she was raped. She wasn't, and at no point does the story even hint at that being the case. It's about the downsides of dating in the age of social media, where so much of the traditional courtship happens over text rather than through dates (meaning you might not get to properly know the other person), the pressures and insecurities a young woman experiences, the expectations she feels she has to live up to and the fear of what could happen if she doesn't.
She wasn't leading him on, she had fallen for an idealized version of him. She was interested in Robert, just not Robert as he existed in the real world (so to speak). Real Robert isn't really a nice guy. Throughout the story, it's kind of hard to tell. Armed with the knowledge of how it ends, though, it's a lot easier to go back and see the signs. Him being condescending towards her, acting disinterested and distant, not answering texts, constantly making her doubt herself, only to swoop in when she's vulnerable to comfort and reassure her. She, however, interprets the things he says and does in a way that better matches up with who she wants him to be, rather than who he really is. This allows her to keep thinking she's in control, that she has the upper hand, when all she's really doing is deluding herself. The Robert she likes doesn't actually exist. Unfortunately, she doesn't realize this before it's gotten to the point where (in her mind) it's too late to pump the brakes. It's easier to just get on with it than to try and stop it. Both because she's afraid of how she'll come off by doing so, and because she's afraid of how he'll react.
Also, I don't think you're meant to sympathize with her when she's disgusted by his gut or whatever, the descriptions are there because the story's being told from her point of view, so you get her unfiltered thoughts as things transpire. It's perfectly fine to think she's unfair, superficial and harsh towards him.
As for the part in bold specifically: What the feck? That's some wild assumptions you're making there, lad. As I said, you're getting angry at your own interpretation of the story.
WWW Wenger -- you should look up "Unreliable narrator" and it might help you understand this story. I did not mention rape - i just talked about the nature of consent. Maybe for you sex is a straightforward and simple act, but for others the world is not as black and white as it is in a Bravo two zero book.
As Halftrack has said - your reaction to the story is interesting. The story highlights her view, we don't have to take it as gospel truth and we don't have to like her, but her view is interesting.
Yup, that was my view on it. Her behaviour at the end is fairly cowardly but other than that, not much she did worthy of criticism (or being called a whore).
Yeah i think what most of the criticisms about her as a character miss is that she never acts on her thoughts. She might feel this guy is a bad kisser or in bad shape or whatever but never once actually says it to him. Even when she has an involuntary laugh she tries to suppress it so as not to offend him.
The point is we cannot control our thoughts but we can control how we act on them; she did, he didn't.
Russell Simmons being accused of multiple rapes
Morgan Spurlock pre-empting a potential scandal by coming clean. Wonder will we see more of this happening.
https://news.sky.com/story/super-si...-misconduct-i-am-part-of-the-problem-11170141
https://news.sky.com/story/super-si...-misconduct-i-am-part-of-the-problem-11170141
Well that is a better approach than others have tried, but has he been that busy in the last few years? - It might be seen as him wanting to ride on the coat-tails of these stories - Maybe that's unfair - i don't follow his work.
Yeah it did cross my mind that this might be an angle. He lied through his teeth for his McDonalds documentary so perhaps this is his "in" for some redemptive documentary on predatory males in the entertainment industry.
I DON'T need to see a plant pot re-enactment though please!