Share good ideas and conversation.   Login, Join Us, or Take a Tour!
comment by tacocat
tacocat  ·  646 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Louis CK's powerful army of enablers

Accepting that these things happen is a great way to preserve the status quo. If you want to change the culture then you have to demonstrate the repercussions. The reason people can abuse power is that the victims are afraid to come forward because they're in a less powerful position. Generally speaking. If Harvey Weinstien harassed Angelina Jolie while she was the most prominent female in Hollywood then that's not uniformly true. But you could explain that by saying she accepted it because it's the behavior she dealt with as she moved through the industry.

I think there are many problems that we are in the position to address at this point in history and they will probably take a culture shift. We've done that before and it was very difficult. Punishment is useful, not my preferred method but I can see its utility here. Accepting that certain things will happen is the best way to preserve the culture. You can accept them while at the same time saying they're unacceptable. I think that's what you're getting at. Like here in the US racism is generally accepted as unacceptable. That doesn't mean it's gone, it just means people who engage in that are more careful about it and it's maybe not as openly exposed as it once was. The racists clump together where they feel their views are accepted. We don't have as much overt racism in casual society as we once did.

The dynamic of men and women is trying to change to disallow this type of sexism but the idea that women are inferior and subservient is deeply entrenched in society to the point where women accept it and also don't even notice certain aspects of it because they're not seen as examples of sexism but rather just culture at large and how it will always be. It takes bravery to stand up against individuals and also societal norms and that's what happened in the Civil Rights Movement and that's what can happen in the near future. Maybe




kleinbl00  ·  646 days ago  ·  link  ·  

    Generally speaking. If Harvey Weinstien harassed Angelina Jolie while she was the most prominent female in Hollywood then that's not uniformly true.

If Harvey Weinstein harassed Angelina Jolie while she was the most prominent female in Hollywood, it would have been done to prove that Harvey Weinstein was more powerful than the most prominent female in Hollywood. Nonconsentual sexual acts are about power. "I'm more powerful than you, I don't need your consent." "I'm more powerful than you, I can steamroller you into consent." "I'm more powerful than you, I can convince the world you gave consent."

goobster is not wrong - the structure in place gave that power to men. What we're observing is a challenge to that structure. Here's a guess:

NBC did not run the Weinstein story, even knowing it was right, even knowing it was morally imperative, even knowing history would be on their side. They did not run it because they knew that if they were to fire the first volley, they would be consumed by an Inquisition that would have destroyed their internal culture, consumed their reporting, and dominated their dialog for the next two to five years. So they sat on it, made it go away, and chose to be in the position of reacting rather than acting.

The system is in dire need of change. It has been forever. But the first insider that speaks up is gonna get shot. When the corruption is self-supporting the only way to take it down is external force, and it's been such a chummy and insular community that the external forces couldn't get close enough to care.

I'll also say that liberals care about this shit. Conservatives don't. If liberals weren't looking to fight with anything they could defeat, they still wouldn't do anything.

goobster  ·  646 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'm with ya, man.

But I am waiting for the other shoe to drop. Women in power positions also abuse their power. (See: the entire fashion industry, for example.)

It's weird. I'm in two conversations on Hubski right now that both have the same problem:

1. They focus on the SYMPTOM

2. They deny the existence of the actual problem.

In both the Guns Issue and the Abuse of Power issue, the gun and the abuser are only the most visible symptom of the actual underlying problem. In guns, it is The Problem of the Angry White Man, and in Power it is the problem of Power Conferring Immunity.

Sexist men in power?!? That is SHOCKING! Shocking, I say!

Powerless angry white men exert their power via guns, while powerful old and ugly men force pretty women to have sex with them to get ahead.

Hm. I'm seeing a pattern here...

tacocat  ·  645 days ago  ·  link  ·  

It's false equivalency to bring up women in power. They're not as numerous so it's not such an entrenched problem. The issue is men in power abusing it and the reasons that make it difficult to come forward and the culture that you said needs to change. People in power will always abuse power. I've seen people with tiny little bits of power over inconsequential things get all self important and abuse something that's meaningless to most everyone. It confuses the issue when people look for exceptions to an issue that isn't related to the issue but seems so. The issue is sexual harassment by men in power being pervasive in Hollywood and really the world as a whole. Yes, women can do similar things but it's not so common as to become a talking point in a discussion about men jerking off in front of women only because they can.

goobster  ·  643 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Agreed. Fully.

tacocat  ·  645 days ago  ·  link  ·  
This comment has been deleted.