1 2 3 >  Last ›
 
   
 

#MeToo backfires again

 
Igawa
 
Avatar
 
 
Igawa
Total Posts:  375
Joined  19-07-2017
 
 
 
04 December 2018 10:00
 

Pence Effect

Did you see this coming? Was it worth it?

 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  16981
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
04 December 2018 10:25
 

Yep! Pay hookers and get a contract, that is the only safe route in the new world of women’s rules.

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  6565
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
04 December 2018 14:23
 

“Just try not to be an asshole.”

Its right there in the article.

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6152
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
05 December 2018 18:48
 

That’s stupid. Don’t be a dick, don’t force it, try to remain professional, be aware of the cues, have a healthy sense of humor and keep fucking.

 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9210
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
06 December 2018 06:09
 
Jefe - 04 December 2018 02:23 PM

“Just try not to be an asshole.”

Its right there in the article.

That’s as subjective as you can get.  In the Neil Degrasse Tyson sexual assault thread, Neil’s side of the story sounds like he is dorky and clumsy around women, but now his entire life and career is up for review.

Until a new balance is found, men are advised to protect themselves, especially those in a position of power.  Dom’t get me wrong, though, as I believe many accusations are warranted, and that the frat boy culture should be toned down, but when the future is uncertain then expect certain people to avoid risks to protect themselves.

 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  4929
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
06 December 2018 10:17
 

I think a lot of these conversations are sabotaged by the impulse to justify a narrative with isolated anecdotes. From all sides. The liabilities of fame are largely the same as they ever were as are the liabilities of working in a supervisorial position. One of the facets of living in a community is that mistakes will be made, blame will sometimes be improperly distributed, innocent people will get hurt… None of this began with #metoo. The landscape is different in the sense that a group of people who had little recourse in the past have more recourse now. Will there be fallout? Yes. Is this somehow reflective of a deficit in ethos? I don’t think so. We should all hold ourselves to the better standard. We should all cooperate with the transition.

Companies will not abruptly stop hiring women out of fear except in similarly isolated circumstances. People of competence will rise because of simple economic interest.

 
Quadrewple
 
Avatar
 
 
Quadrewple
Total Posts:  413
Joined  28-04-2017
 
 
 
07 December 2018 12:09
 

The further we get from our evolution, the more complex life becomes.  The logic of the Pence Rule is irrefutable, and makes sense if you have a low risk tolerance for losing your reputation and freedom.

The fact that a man (Mike Pence) popularized the idea of no 1 men 1 women alone behind closed doors is interesting, because why didn’t the feminists ask for that first?  Why is Mike Pence’s risk tolerance infinitely lower than all these women who claim to be so worried about their safety?  It doesn’t take a genius to see that the narrative out there about how much danger women are in from men has more holes than a wounded soldier.

[ Edited: 07 December 2018 12:48 by Quadrewple]
 
 
nonverbal
 
Avatar
 
 
nonverbal
Total Posts:  1374
Joined  31-10-2015
 
 
 
07 December 2018 12:29
 
Quadrewple - 07 December 2018 12:09 PM

The further we get from our evolution, the more complex life becomes.  The logic of the Pence Rule is irrefutable, and makes sense if you have a low risk tolerance for losing your reputation and freedom.

The fact that a man (Mike Pence) popularized the idea of no 1 men 1 women alone behind closed doors is interesting, because why didn’t the feminists ask for that first?  Why is Mike Pence’s risk tolerance infinitely lower than all these women who claim to be so worried about their safety?  It’s doesn’t take a genius to see that the narrative out there about how much danger women are in from men has more holes than a wounded soldier.

My best guess is that Pense has a wandering eye, realizes that his eye has a tendency to wander, and has no idea how to stop it. He understands the potential consequences of eye-for-an-eye retribution! Aye yai yai! (Only guessing, obviously.)

 

 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  9210
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
07 December 2018 17:20
 
Quadrewple - 07 December 2018 12:09 PM

The further we get from our evolution, the more complex life becomes.  The logic of the Pence Rule is irrefutable, and makes sense if you have a low risk tolerance for losing your reputation and freedom.

The fact that a man (Mike Pence) popularized the idea of no 1 men 1 women alone behind closed doors is interesting, because why didn’t the feminists ask for that first?  Why is Mike Pence’s risk tolerance infinitely lower than all these women who claim to be so worried about their safety?  It doesn’t take a genius to see that the narrative out there about how much danger women are in from men has more holes than a wounded soldier.

Women have been doing their best to protect themselves from the predaations of men for eons, but they need a life, too.  Women were asked if all the men were known to be absent, what would they do, and a big answer was to go for an evening stroll.  Protection works both ways.

 
Quadrewple
 
Avatar
 
 
Quadrewple
Total Posts:  413
Joined  28-04-2017
 
 
 
07 December 2018 22:41
 
Skipshot - 07 December 2018 05:20 PM
Quadrewple - 07 December 2018 12:09 PM

The further we get from our evolution, the more complex life becomes.  The logic of the Pence Rule is irrefutable, and makes sense if you have a low risk tolerance for losing your reputation and freedom.

The fact that a man (Mike Pence) popularized the idea of no 1 men 1 women alone behind closed doors is interesting, because why didn’t the feminists ask for that first?  Why is Mike Pence’s risk tolerance infinitely lower than all these women who claim to be so worried about their safety?  It doesn’t take a genius to see that the narrative out there about how much danger women are in from men has more holes than a wounded soldier.

Women have been doing their best to protect themselves from the predaations of men for eons, but they need a life, too.  Women were asked if all the men were known to be absent, what would they do, and a big answer was to go for an evening stroll.  Protection works both ways.

I don’t disagree with anything you’re saying.  I’m just saying that Mike Pence is implementing more preventative measures for his fear (any type of accusation of anything) than almost every woman, who is presumably fearing sexual assault or rape.  In other words, either he’s just a really smart guy for thinking of this idea for women to use ( who on average are far more vulnerable than Mike Pence ) or it could be that women didn’t think of that idea because they don’t want that (on average).

 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
 
Avatar
 
 
TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher
Total Posts:  586
Joined  13-02-2017
 
 
 
08 December 2018 03:17
 

To Brick Bungalow’s point, absent formal study, it is so hard to tell how representative these anecdotes are, therefore how pervasive the problem is for either men or women, therefore how insane or sensible a particular response to the problem might be.  Any working researcher encounters this problem of representativeness on a daily basis, and the ready access of the Internet makes this concern all the more salient, and important.  Now it affects everyone; we are blasted with anecdote after anecdote of something happening, and in kicks our probably inevitable tendency to generalize from these incidences.  We want a general trend to make our specific situations more predictable and our responses more apriori appropriate.  But generalization, prediction, and the security of an apriori appropriate response is only sound if the sampling is representative, and just who out there in all the chatter is determining what is representative and what is not?

That said, as for the Pence Effect specifically, JHC grow a pair, and learn to let the Big Head do your thinking and responding.  Do both and probably 90% of these problems would vanish.

[ Edited: 08 December 2018 03:29 by TheAnal_lyticPhilosopher]
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2691
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
08 December 2018 04:25
 
Brick Bungalow - 06 December 2018 10:17 AM

I think a lot of these conversations are sabotaged by the impulse to justify a narrative with isolated anecdotes. From all sides. The liabilities of fame are largely the same as they ever were as are the liabilities of working in a supervisorial position. One of the facets of living in a community is that mistakes will be made, blame will sometimes be improperly distributed, innocent people will get hurt… None of this began with #metoo. The landscape is different in the sense that a group of people who had little recourse in the past have more recourse now. Will there be fallout? Yes. Is this somehow reflective of a deficit in ethos? I don’t think so. We should all hold ourselves to the better standard. We should all cooperate with the transition.

Companies will not abruptly stop hiring women out of fear except in similarly isolated circumstances. People of competence will rise because of simple economic interest.

I agree and well said.

This so-called Pence Effect described in the OP article does indeed seem to be one of these isolated anecdotes to justify a narrative.  A knee-jerk reaction to what Pence said – he avoids dining alone with any woman other than his wife – which excluding work lunches, could be interpreted as that he doesn’t go on what could be construed as a date with any woman other than his wife.

A continuation of a narrative that just serves to cause men to worry more than is warranted.

 

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  6998
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
08 December 2018 08:46
 
Jan_CAN - 08 December 2018 04:25 AM
Brick Bungalow - 06 December 2018 10:17 AM

I think a lot of these conversations are sabotaged by the impulse to justify a narrative with isolated anecdotes. From all sides. The liabilities of fame are largely the same as they ever were as are the liabilities of working in a supervisorial position. One of the facets of living in a community is that mistakes will be made, blame will sometimes be improperly distributed, innocent people will get hurt… None of this began with #metoo. The landscape is different in the sense that a group of people who had little recourse in the past have more recourse now. Will there be fallout? Yes. Is this somehow reflective of a deficit in ethos? I don’t think so. We should all hold ourselves to the better standard. We should all cooperate with the transition.

Companies will not abruptly stop hiring women out of fear except in similarly isolated circumstances. People of competence will rise because of simple economic interest.

I agree and well said.

This so-called Pence Effect described in the OP article does indeed seem to be one of these isolated anecdotes to justify a narrative.  A knee-jerk reaction to what Pence said – he avoids dining alone with any woman other than his wife – which excluding work lunches, could be interpreted as that he doesn’t go on what could be construed as a date with any woman other than his wife.

A continuation of a narrative that just serves to cause men to worry more than is warranted.

A couple of (so far disconnected), thoughts rambling around in my brain on this topic:

1 - I’m 100% in favor of eliminating sexual harassment. I know it’s a real problem.
2 - Love him or hate him, Jordan Peterson’s point is that we’re still new at having men and women working together. It’s complicated, and we haven’t figured out the rules yet.
3 - I can envision a direction in which we all have to start wearing the same uniforms at work - that strikes me as dystopian.
4 - I can envision many circumstances in which men will simply start excluding women - doesn’t seem far fetched to me.
5 - If I’m to believe the women throughout my work career, they enjoy flirting with their peers. I’m now happily married and I work from home. But my office career would have been much less fun if none of the flirting had happened. (I was also very fortunate to stumble into tech companies that were about 50/50 men to women and 50/50 all the way up the management ladder.)

 
 
Jb8989
 
Avatar
 
 
Jb8989
Total Posts:  6152
Joined  31-01-2012
 
 
 
08 December 2018 09:44
 
icehorse - 08 December 2018 08:46 AM
Jan_CAN - 08 December 2018 04:25 AM
Brick Bungalow - 06 December 2018 10:17 AM

I think a lot of these conversations are sabotaged by the impulse to justify a narrative with isolated anecdotes. From all sides. The liabilities of fame are largely the same as they ever were as are the liabilities of working in a supervisorial position. One of the facets of living in a community is that mistakes will be made, blame will sometimes be improperly distributed, innocent people will get hurt… None of this began with #metoo. The landscape is different in the sense that a group of people who had little recourse in the past have more recourse now. Will there be fallout? Yes. Is this somehow reflective of a deficit in ethos? I don’t think so. We should all hold ourselves to the better standard. We should all cooperate with the transition.

Companies will not abruptly stop hiring women out of fear except in similarly isolated circumstances. People of competence will rise because of simple economic interest.

I agree and well said.

This so-called Pence Effect described in the OP article does indeed seem to be one of these isolated anecdotes to justify a narrative.  A knee-jerk reaction to what Pence said – he avoids dining alone with any woman other than his wife – which excluding work lunches, could be interpreted as that he doesn’t go on what could be construed as a date with any woman other than his wife.

A continuation of a narrative that just serves to cause men to worry more than is warranted.

A couple of (so far disconnected), thoughts rambling around in my brain on this topic:

1 - I’m 100% in favor of eliminating sexual harassment. I know it’s a real problem.
2 - Love him or hate him, Jordan Peterson’s point is that we’re still new at having men and women working together. It’s complicated, and we haven’t figured out the rules yet.
3 - I can envision a direction in which we all have to start wearing the same uniforms at work - that strikes me as dystopian.
4 - I can envision many circumstances in which men will simply start excluding women - doesn’t seem far fetched to me.
5 - If I’m to believe the women throughout my work career, they enjoy flirting with their peers. I’m now happily married and I work from home. But my office career would have been much less fun if none of the flirting had happened. (I was also very fortunate to stumble into tech companies that were about 50/50 men to women and 50/50 all the way up the management ladder.)

Mindless flirtation is another person’s false hope. I think the problem is desperation. It fucks with one’s social skills, and I think it’s what leads to men and women taking risks with misconstruing consensual cues.

There’s an energy to flirtation. It’s difficult to line itemize the rules on it. If companies start trying to regulate it more they’ll likely run into language problems in thier policy guidelines. The result could be hard line opposite sex avoidances, but I’m hoping the scene goes the other way and people just start acting quicker when things feel right. Rather than the already fucked up sex rituals that predated metoo. I’m of the belief that society should be having way more sex than they are.

[ Edited: 08 December 2018 09:47 by Jb8989]
 
 
Jan_CAN
 
Avatar
 
 
Jan_CAN
Total Posts:  2691
Joined  21-10-2016
 
 
 
08 December 2018 10:01
 
icehorse - 08 December 2018 08:46 AM

A couple of (so far disconnected), thoughts rambling around in my brain on this topic:

1 - I’m 100% in favor of eliminating sexual harassment. I know it’s a real problem.
2 - Love him or hate him, Jordan Peterson’s point is that we’re still new at having men and women working together. It’s complicated, and we haven’t figured out the rules yet.
3 - I can envision a direction in which we all have to start wearing the same uniforms at work - that strikes me as dystopian.
4 - I can envision many circumstances in which men will simply start excluding women - doesn’t seem far fetched to me.
5 - If I’m to believe the women throughout my work career, they enjoy flirting with their peers. I’m now happily married and I work from home. But my office career would have been much less fun if none of the flirting had happened. (I was also very fortunate to stumble into tech companies that were about 50/50 men to women and 50/50 all the way up the management ladder.)

1.  Good.
2.  It is obvious to me that Jordan Peterson has difficulties relating to women so it is not surprising that he hasn’t figured it out.
3.  Not going to happen.
4.  Not going to happen.
5.  Depending on how you define ‘flirting’, it does not necessarily equate with harassment.  Common sense, sensitivity, and a little class are needed.  Hint:  telling a woman co-worker she has a nice ass – harassment, not flirting; eye contact and friendly banter when it is clearly wanted/reciprocated – probably okay.  If in any doubt how to do it – don’t; save it for your personal life.

[ Edited: 08 December 2018 10:03 by Jan_CAN]
 
 
GAD
 
Avatar
 
 
GAD
Total Posts:  16981
Joined  15-02-2008
 
 
 
08 December 2018 10:54
 
Jb8989 - 08 December 2018 09:44 AM

I’m of the belief that society should be having way more sex than they are.

But we sped 1000’s of years vilifying it and trying to control it with religion, politics and society. Everyone still wants it but now it’s buried under a mountain of religion, politics and self-righteous bullshit.

 
 
 1 2 3 >  Last ›