4 ms·

I have to agree with the assertions that 2. is victim blaming. The group 1. needs to do everything in their power, which they control quite a bit, to stay away

I have to agree with the assertions that 2. is victim blaming. The group 1. needs to do everything in their power, which they control quite a bit, to stay away from the possibilities of a group 2. situation. People, mostly men, in power need to have the moral and virtuous fortitude to promote an environment for collaboration and camaraderie of work. It is incumbent of those in power to create a culture of cooperation. If that culture does not exist and bad behavior ensues than it is not incumbent of the victim to improve the culture. Especially if that victim is a junior professional. I'm saddened that this topic even needs to be part of our discourse in our culture today. Perhaps this is a sad old story. Yet we see this all the time of people in power in the news. I hope that we can come to a collective realization that this is doing no one any good to behave irresponsibly.

imartin2k 9y ago
Your assumption is that group 1. is (or at least has been until 2017) aware of the huge problem of their behavior. I think this is wrong, and this a prerequisite for my comment. Imagine this: You are John Smith and since you were young, you have been taught that as a man, you have to get laid as much as possible, that women are sex objects, that your self-worth depends on your success as a sexual predator. Your friends happened to think the same (you maybe picked your friends even based on these value, subconsciously), and so, while you grew up, this is how you lived and acted. And it worked. You had sex with a lot of women, you received praise and acknowledgement from your peers, you felt like a real man and so on. And you gt comparatively little push back. Sure, there was something in you which might have told you that you over and over again hitting on the same girl must have been annoying for her - but as every human, you saw things from your perspective, and from that one - which you have learned and internalized over decades - this is what women wanted, and how it was supposed to be. Couldn't this be how the men from group 1 became those who there are? And wouldn't this mean that what they in fact would have needed was to learn a different way of behavior, through feedback when they stepped over the lines? Following your logic, decades of social conditioning would automatically disappear. You are using the word "need" multiple times. Of course. But what if they actually really didn't get the memo? Because this is more likely than these men sharing your value set (or mine, for that matter) but violating it constantly and deliberately. Some would call this behavior "toxic masculinity". And it is. But exactly like the social conditioning that other groups were exposed to doesn't just fall off of people in a second, toxic masculinity does neither.
- ashwinpp 9y ago
  I like nuanced comments and you make cogent arguments. However, I believe that most people in group 1, are in fact aware of the problem of their behaviour and are willingly ignorant of it. This is because if they made any unwanted advances against women, even if the women didn't tell them to stop or publicly humiliate them, they surely ignored or tried to get away from the situation. At the very least the victim did not enjoy it and that is feedback enough. Anywhere in the course of history where there was a stronger party forcing themselves on a weaker party, the pain of the weaker party is visible in plain sight and ignored by the stronger party. Now the question boils down to whether a perpetrator considers the victim to be a human with a standing equal to his/her own. The answer to that question has been a resounding no, whether it was slavery or war crimes or sexual assault. To summarize, lack of feedback cannot be the reason, willful ignorance and dehumanization perhaps is and that is something the victim cannot be tasked with rectifying.
  - imartin2k 9y ago
    I still think you seem to lack the willingness to engage in exploring how these type of men think, which also means that your verdict about lack of feedback not being the reason doesn’t appear too convincing to me. Otherwise you would be aware that “being ignored” is widely considered “playing hard to get” among men with this mindset. Emphasis on “play”. If one has been exposed to a certain type of mindset and has internalized it, this person’s viewpoint and their perception of reality might be absolutely different than yours (and mine). This of course is a re-occuring theme of the past year(s). People not making the effort to understand why others act/behave/vote radically different. It seems to be unbelievably hard to acknowledge that what might be despicible from one’s own viewpoint might appear completely reasonable from someone else’s in their specific context. Which doesn‘t excuse their actions but explains why they have not been seeing/noticing the obvious damage of their behavioral patters. In order to change that person’s viewpoint requires work from the ground up.
frabbit 9y ago
Don't be saddened. This is potentially a time for change. A good time. I hope we can look back at this and never be able to imagine going back to the widespread abuse of the less powerful. Laurie Penny writes very well about all this sort of thing: https://longreads.com/2017/12/05/the-consent-of-the-ungoverned/ https://longreads.com/2017/12/05/the-consent-of-the-ungovern...

imartin2k 9y ago

Your assumption is that group 1. is (or at least has been until 2017) aware of the huge problem of their behavior. I think this is wrong, and this a prerequisite for my comment. Imagine this: You are John Smith and since you were young, you have been taught that as a man, you have to get laid as much as possible, that women are sex objects, that your self-worth depends on your success as a sexual predator. Your friends happened to think the same (you maybe picked your friends even based on these value, subconsciously), and so, while you grew up, this is how you lived and acted. And it worked. You had sex with a lot of women, you received praise and acknowledgement from your peers, you felt like a real man and so on. And you gt comparatively little push back. Sure, there was something in you which might have told you that you over and over again hitting on the same girl must have been annoying for her - but as every human, you saw things from your perspective, and from that one - which you have learned and internalized over decades - this is what women wanted, and how it was supposed to be. Couldn't this be how the men from group 1 became those who there are? And wouldn't this mean that what they in fact would have needed was to learn a different way of behavior, through feedback when they stepped over the lines? Following your logic, decades of social conditioning would automatically disappear. You are using the word "need" multiple times. Of course. But what if they actually really didn't get the memo? Because this is more likely than these men sharing your value set (or mine, for that matter) but violating it constantly and deliberately. Some would call this behavior "toxic masculinity". And it is. But exactly like the social conditioning that other groups were exposed to doesn't just fall off of people in a second, toxic masculinity does neither.

ashwinpp 9y ago
I like nuanced comments and you make cogent arguments. However, I believe that most people in group 1, are in fact aware of the problem of their behaviour and are willingly ignorant of it. This is because if they made any unwanted advances against women, even if the women didn't tell them to stop or publicly humiliate them, they surely ignored or tried to get away from the situation. At the very least the victim did not enjoy it and that is feedback enough. Anywhere in the course of history where there was a stronger party forcing themselves on a weaker party, the pain of the weaker party is visible in plain sight and ignored by the stronger party. Now the question boils down to whether a perpetrator considers the victim to be a human with a standing equal to his/her own. The answer to that question has been a resounding no, whether it was slavery or war crimes or sexual assault. To summarize, lack of feedback cannot be the reason, willful ignorance and dehumanization perhaps is and that is something the victim cannot be tasked with rectifying.
- imartin2k 9y ago
  I still think you seem to lack the willingness to engage in exploring how these type of men think, which also means that your verdict about lack of feedback not being the reason doesn’t appear too convincing to me. Otherwise you would be aware that “being ignored” is widely considered “playing hard to get” among men with this mindset. Emphasis on “play”. If one has been exposed to a certain type of mindset and has internalized it, this person’s viewpoint and their perception of reality might be absolutely different than yours (and mine). This of course is a re-occuring theme of the past year(s). People not making the effort to understand why others act/behave/vote radically different. It seems to be unbelievably hard to acknowledge that what might be despicible from one’s own viewpoint might appear completely reasonable from someone else’s in their specific context. Which doesn‘t excuse their actions but explains why they have not been seeing/noticing the obvious damage of their behavioral patters. In order to change that person’s viewpoint requires work from the ground up.

frabbit 9y ago

Don't be saddened. This is potentially a time for change. A good time. I hope we can look back at this and never be able to imagine going back to the widespread abuse of the less powerful. Laurie Penny writes very well about all this sort of thing: https://longreads.com/2017/12/05/the-consent-of-the-ungoverned/ https://longreads.com/2017/12/05/the-consent-of-the-ungovern...