A recent
survey shows that one third of young people believe it is usually sexual
harassment when a man other than one’s partner compliments a woman’s
clothing. So then, was it sexual
harassment when my male coworker complimented my new hairstyle? I certainly didn’t think so at the time, but
in today’s environment I would seemingly be justified in coming forward and saying,
“me too.” Did it matter that the
coworker was gay? We don’t need to spend
time on that, because I also had a male heterosexual coworker compliment my new
outfit: clearly, in today’s climate, a “me too” offense. One
fourth of these same young people surveyed believe it is always harassment when
a man invites a woman for a drink. If we
were to put a stop to this sort of behavior it might mean that about half of my
friends who are happily married would never have gotten to know the person who
ultimately became their spouse.
A female
friend was in Starbucks earlier today, in line behind an elderly man. The barista was having trouble figuring out
how to put honey into the man’s tea, so the order was taking a while. The man turned to my friend to apologize for
how long his order was taking and they struck up a friendly conversation. That is, until my friend was overtaken by the
hysteria of the times and wondered if this could be interpreted as harassment, should
she continue, and if she did was she bringing it on, and might the kindly
gentleman be seen by someone as harassing my friend and then be accused? So, my friend (who was enjoying the simple
social interaction and was in no way offended) broke off the conversation,
leaving the man to wonder what he had done to offend her (and indeed, he had
done nothing). Thus, sadly and badly ended
a simple and kind interaction between two people.
Is this
really where we want to go? Will a smile
and a hello on the street to a passing stranger soon be condemned?
Is this the
new face of feminism? Or is there something else going on?
Feminism in
the past has been an ideology manifested in social and political movements whose
goal is to achieve political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.
MeToo does
none of that.
What MeToo
does is create victims. It has become
fashionable to be able to post “me too” on social media, especially when the
alleged perpetrator of the “me too” act is a public figure. Creating a class of victims is a way of un-empowering
those placed in that class (see this blog’s posting dated 11/12/17). One who claims, “me too” is labeled and
enters the MeToo victimhood. And the
remedy given to this class of victims is nothing more than to scream “me too” and
perhaps be used by others for their own political or power gain. That
is not a real remedy and it does not provide real power. It does nothing to achieve equality.
What would
better give these alleged victims power would be to teach them what is and what
is not harassment and how to respond to actual harassment or assault, both in
the moment and after the fact. It would
be better to teach the real remedies for real harassment and how to pursue
those remedies, for that provides a far better resolution than some 15 seconds
of fame for screaming “me too.”
MeToo takes
responsibility away from women, and in so doing gives them a false sense of
power. Yes, saying “me too” seems to
provide a power to silence every type of male-female interaction which a
particular woman might dislike, and it may seem to provide some sort of revenge
against an individual against whom one has a grievance. This is a momentary gratification, a
momentary power. In the end, it usually
fades leaving one not with a real remedy but only with a question: “is that all
there is?”
In
conflating all affronts into the very same category, MeToo makes true harassment
claims meaningless, thus demeaning and cheapening the real hurt and injury
suffered by women who were truly harassed, assaulted, or raped. In seeming to provide a resolution, it
provides none while taking away real resolution from those women who deserve
and do seek it.
MeToo
teaches that the way one resolves any affront is to run to the press to present
a grievance rather than the proper authorities or other appropriate body to
have it resolved and in so doing it makes the court of public opinion superior
to the court of law. By elevating a cry
of “me too” to some sort of justice, we are negating the need to teach women
about harassment, assault, and the legal remedies to which a woman afflicted by
such acts is entitled. There becomes no
need for a woman to learn about normally interacting with a male, how to deflect
unpleasant words, how to say “no” when she needs to, because all she has to do
is let whatever happens happen and then, if bothered, say “me too.”
There are
some instances where the woman truly has no control, but there are many others
where women do or could have some modicum of control or even those in which
they either knowingly or unwittingly encouraged or consented to the complained
of behavior. Women need to be taught that they have the right to decide what
behavior is acceptable to them individually and then taught how to counter behavior
that they have determined that for them individually is not OK. But MeToo
encourages women to avoid making decisions, or to deflect any guilt for
decisions they later regret by simply blaming another. This is not the type of empowerment that the
feminists have typically sought. It is
the sort of thing that powerless victims do.
While it does provide some power – to destroy others without due
process, to seek revenge for real or perceived affronts, to perhaps give one a
way to justify some behavior of their own of which they are now ashamed – it does
nothing to give women the means to assert their individuality and equality and
find the justice in the world that the women’s movement once sought.
The “me too”
hysteria, while not empowering women, does reflect something very dangerous in
our society today. We have become a
society in which we are carried by the sensational and hysterical emotion of
the day. Today it is the harassment claims
that demand an end to all normal male-female conversation or interaction. Before that it was Russia (and Russia is
still with us, ready to become the hysteria du jour again when the harassment hysteria
runs its course). Before Russia it was white
cops killing blacks, after every mass shooting it is gun control. We get all worked up over the sensation of
the day. We vent. But we do nothing. The hysteria prevents real dialogue between
differing groups or viewpoints. We don’t really think deeply about the problem
or what its causes are or how to rectify it.
That takes time and effort.
Instead, we move on to the next trending topic.
In the meantime, each hysteria gives rise to another group of victims. Today it is the MeToo women. Tomorrow it may be the MeToo accused. Every group of victims reacts with anger and perhaps hatred towards those they perceived to have victimized them (e.g. victims of gun violence against gun owners, people of color against white, poor against wealthy, women against men). This group vs. group is useful to and often encouraged by those seeking to use the victims and their group identity to further their own power. It is not, however, useful to the victims themselves.
And, this
hysteria gives a false power along with fear of being able to destroy someone
on your word, or the word of public opinion alone. Democracy does not issue convictions on someone's word alone. While the lure of media entertainment and
hysteria existed before the Trump presidency (indeed, we can see it even in the Salem witch trials of the 1600s), it has become all encompassing since
President Trump took office and his opponents and haters have sought one sensation after
another as a way of de-legitimizing his presidency, removing his supporters
from office, with an ultimate goal of removing him. Now we are seeing “me too” resulting in
politicians, entertainers, journalists, and others being removed from office or
their careers ruined based only on someone’s word and the surrounding societal
frenzy of the moment. This court of
public opinion is using its victims to remove and destroy all not in favor of
the public outcry of the day. Today it
is any man accused of a “me too” violation.
Tomorrow….?
Finally,
teaching to distrust if not dislike or even hate men (about half of our population) is not healthy
nor is it rational biologically (though perhaps it is a way to further destroy
the deteriorating family structure, but that is a subject for another post). People
need to be able to trust those unlike and with differing views than their own
so that they can have an open and honest dialogue and begin to understand one another. With understanding of differing viewpoints,
desires, values, and needs comes true steps towards equality. Teaching distrust and hate does nothing but
interfere with the tools necessary to equality as well as our democracy.
So, how to
empower the “me too” women? Teach them
about our democracy and how it works. Educate
them about their rights. Believe that
they can think for themselves and expect them to do so. Allow them not to be victims or tools that
support the latest media sensation, not tools of a political agenda, but real
people entitled to real justice provided by our democracy, its laws and their enforcement
in our courts of law. Help them to stand
up for their real rights and demand that they perform the duties necessary to
those rights. Teach that dialogue and
understanding are powerful tools. And
help them to understand the difference between a simple societal pleasantry,
even if delivered awkwardly or creepily, and real harassment for which they
have real remedies beyond the 15 seconds of “me too” fame.
No comments:
Post a Comment