Support NeoGAF

[BobbyRobby]

It concerns me that "waiting for the facts" seems to mean "waiting for confirmation that my preconceived notions of gender politics apply to this situation" for many people. Men's Rights is clearly picking up steam as a movement.

It could just mean they would like to have all the facts before passing judgement.

That's a pretty normal stance to take. Courts will gather evidence and wait before passing judgement.

I wouldn't take it as a sign that a Men's Rights movement is picking up steam.

A great many males in this thread are asking why offering behavioral ideas to harassment victims is considered so unacceptable by the female posters.

Look at recent studies regarding the differences between communication styles.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/voices/yourvoice/conversation1.shtml

Men have a tendency to offer solutions to problems, as though it is the way to make the original problem. This reaction does not make women happy, because they are perfectly capable of finding their own solutions. They seek understanding in a conversation. Also, telling women solutions rather implies that they couldn't have thought of them, and is therefore patronizing.

If males wish to offer solutions, it would be more helpful if they came up with ways to explain to the harasser why he is wrong. Perhaps if a male explains it, it will be more understandable without the gender communication variances.

This is pretty interesting. I hope you don't get flak for claiming there is a difference in the sexes.

 

[HP_Wuvcraft]

He apologized and I can't fully blame him for writing that. Go read Jaffe's rape post and then you'll see why he wrote "basically".

Rape is one of those things that sets me off. My blood boiled. That being said, I knew it was wrong to be that curt without fully backing up my words (especially when talking to someone who had not read the entire thread), so I apologized.

 

[APF]

It could just mean they would like to have all the facts before passing judgement.

Judgement on what?

 

[jim-jam bongs]

It could just mean they would like to have all the facts before passing judgement.

That's a pretty normal stance to take. Courts will gather evidence and wait before passing judgement.

I wouldn't take it as a sign that a Men's Rights movement is picking up steam.

Like JDSN said, the facts were all there. The only reason to start doubting and second guessing things is because you want to work this scenario into some broader narrative about how men are the innocent victims of scandalous attacks by those evil feminazis, or how it's just so unfair that women make it impossible to figure out when it's appropriate to proposition them by discussing oral sex in an otherwise professionally motivated conversation.

 

[BobbyRobby]

Judgement on what?

From what I've seen, it was enough for me to pass judgement that the guy was a creep. For other more cynical people, it may not be.

Don't be offended that people aren't willing to jump down someone's throat as quickly as you or I. If you are confident in your position, I don't see how waiting for more facts to emerge is a problem.

Remember the incident involving the transgendered person at the Microsoft conference? Weird things happen.

Like JDSN said, the facts were all there. The only reason to start doubting and second guessing things is because you want to work this scenario into some broader narrative about how men are the innocent victims of scandalous attacks by those evil feminazis, or how it's just so unfair that women make it impossible to figure out when it's appropriate to proposition them by discussing oral sex in an otherwise professionally motivated conversation.

then why aren't all court cases decided in a timely manner without thorough investigation?

I take issue with the bolded. It's just not true. Those are not the only reasons why someone might want to wait for more facts to emerge before passing judgement.

 

[JDSN]

I hope you don't get flak for claiming there is a difference in the sexes.

Why should he? The idea of sexual equality acknowledges that men and women are different but at the same time equal. You seem to be mischaracterizing the people here and the point they are trying to make.

From what I've seen, it was enough for me to pass judgement that the guy was a creep. For other more cynical people, it may not be.

Don't be offended that people aren't willing to jump down someone's throat as quickly as you or I. If you are confident in your position, I don't see how waiting for more facts to emerge is a problem.

Remember the incident involving the transgendered person at the Microsoft conference? Weird things happen.

The guy admitted it through this apology, his staff said he was probably stepping down, there are screen caps of the conversation, not sure what else is needed to make this a "fact". Again, quick trying to frame the people here as rabid for some internet justice, it hurts whatever point you are trying to make.

 

[Mental Atrophy]

Can we stop equating identifying courses of action with victim blaming? Victim blaming is used to justify or mitigate the liability of the perpetrator. There is a world of difference between suggesting a victim should say "stop" because it can ameliorate the situation and suggesting that by not saying "stop" the victim is responsible in any meaningful quantity. It implies that in any scenario, victims are and should remain powerless, which isn't always true and the elminating the latter should be a goal wherever possible. You can have power and still not be responsible, contrary to what Uncle Ben might say. Otherwise we wouldn't teach defensive driving techniques, or any other assortment preventative measures.

 

[APF]

From what I've seen, it was enough for me to pass judgement that the guy was a creep. For other more cynical people, it may not be.

So you're waiting for information that tells us what? That she secretly was asking for it, and that's why she didn't tell him off directly? This doesn't add up. The guy apologized for being a creep, that was in the OP.

 

[Devolution]

Can we stop equating identifying courses of action with victim blaming? Victim blaming is used to justify or mitigate the liability of the perpetrator. There is a world of difference between suggesting a victim should say "stop" because it can ameliorate the situation and suggesting that by not saying "stop" the victim is responsible in any meaningful quantity. It implies that in any scenario, victims are and should remain powerless, which isn't always true and the elminating the latter should be a goal wherever possible. You can have power and still not be responsible, contrary to what Uncle Ben might say. Otherwise we wouldn't teach defensive driving techniques, or any other assortment preventative measures.

You empower victims by laying a foundation for them so that when shit hits the fan they have a means of recourse, staying "stop" in the moment doesn't quality as a solution for every problem, I wish you and some others would face that fact.

Also one shouldn't patronize a victim or victims after the fact then get pissy when people call them out on lacking empathy. It's a complete disregard of the situation the victim is in and a call to your own privilege to say "well I'd handle it this way" or "you should have handled it this way."

 

[jim-jam bongs]

Can we stop equating identifying courses of action with victim blaming? Victim blaming is used to justify or mitigate the liability of the perpetrator. There is a world of difference between suggesting a victim should say "stop" because it can ameliorate the situation and suggesting that by not saying "stop" the victim is responsible in any meaningful quantity. It implies that in any scenario, victims are and should remain powerless, which isn't always true and the elminating the latter should be a goal wherever possible. You can have power and still not be responsible, contrary to what Uncle Ben might say. Otherwise we wouldn't teach defensive driving techniques, or any other assortment preventative measures.

It's classic victim blaming because the implication is that he would have stopped if only she told him to. Aside from being impossible to prove, the onus should not be placed on the victim of bad behaviour to prevent it.

then why aren't all court cases decided in a timely manner without thorough investigation?

I take issue with the bolded. It's just not true. Those are not the only reasons why someone might want to wait for more facts to emerge before passing judgement.

This is the court of public opinion, why are you comparing this with legal proceedings? And if you want to continue down that shaky path, the accused plead guilty. What facts are you waiting for?

 

[Devolution]

It's classic victim blaming because the implication is that he would have stopped if only she told him to. Aside from being impossible to prove, the onus should not be placed on the victim of bad behaviour to prevent it.

And we're all supposedly in agreement this was bad behavior.

So her responsibility is what now?

There is no grey area if you agree his actions were completely uncalled for and reprehensible. That means he shouldn't have done it.

Her actions are one of complete neutrality when faced with a situation in which she didn't want to encourage nor anger the other party. I've been there, many women have.

 

[faceless007]

The only difference between tips and blame is timing.

 

[Figboy79]

It concerns me that "waiting for the facts" seems to mean "waiting for confirmation that my preconceived notions of gender politics apply to this situation" for many people. Men's Rights is clearly picking up steam as a movement.



Hahaha, we have a bent sense of humour in the Bongs household. And yeah, I do respect Mrs Bongs in every way possible. She's smart and successful, graduated cum laude from a seven sisters college and she even makes milk in her boobs. I'm a pretty lucky guy!

LOL! Yeah, me and my wife definitely have a twisted sense of humor as well, but I completely missed the implications of my comment earlier! LOL!

 

[BobbyRobby]

Why should he? The idea of sexual equality acknowledges that men and women are different but at the same time equal. You seem to be mischaracterizing the people here and the point they are trying to make.

The guy admitted it through this apology, his staff said he was probably stepping down, there are screen caps of the conversation, not sure what else is needed to make this a "fact". Again, quick trying to frame the people here as rabid for some internet justice, it hurts whatever point you are trying to make.

Like I have said, it was enough for me to pass judgement. I'm not waiting for any facts to emerge. I'm not skeptical in this case, but there are many times where I am in other situations. I don't see the harm in being skeptical.

I don't see the point in making assumptions about people who wish to wait for more facts to emerge.

They may not have kept up with the story and lack relevant information.

Why assume they are undercover Men's Rights activists with an agenda? Why make this an us versus them partisan dynamic when it doesn't need to be?

 

[Brawndo Addict]

Some sections from Joan Olsson's "Detour Spotting for White Anti-Racists" amended to the situation:

Reality Check and Consequence:

All "blame the victim" behaviors have two things in common. First, they evade the real problem: sexism. Second they delete from the picture the agents of sexism, people and institutions, which either intentionally perpetuate or unintentionally collude with sexism. As long as the focus remains on women we can minimize or dismiss their reactions and never have to look directly at sexism and our own responsibility or collusion.

Attempts are made to isolate a particular incident of sexism from the larger context. We blame a publicized incident of sexism outside our organization to rationalize an internal incident and to avoid facing the reality of sexism within. When trying to resolve an accusation of sexism within an institution, we often see the incident in a vacuum, or as an aberration, in isolation from an historic pattern of sexism. Sexism has been so institutionalized that every "incident" is another symptom of the pattern. If we continued to react incident to incident, crisis to crisis, as though they are unconnected, we will find genuine resolution only further from our reach.

 

[jim-jam bongs]

And we're all supposedly in agreement this was bad behavior.

So her responsibility is what now?

There is no grey area if you agree his actions were completely uncalled for and reprehensible. That means he shouldn't have done it.

Her actions are one of complete neutrality when faced with a situation in which she didn't want to encourage nor anger the other party. I've been there, many women have.

Yeah, I really don't get where people are coming from in this discussion anyway. Surely ignoring his clumsy and sexually explicit advances was enough of a sign that she wasn't buying what he was selling, but apparently mentioning her ongoing divorce was a big green light or something? The mentality is kind of scary honestly, I'm pretty socially inept but that's a whole other level of confusion.

 

[SneakyStephan]

I got as far as 'I will kiss you on the vagina if you do'
I have, what do they call it again? where you feel shame in the place of the person who does something shameful

I can't watch those cringe tv shows either because of it, let alone this

 

[APF]

Like I have said, it was enough for me to pass judgement. I'm not waiting for any facts to emerge. I'm not skeptical in this case, but there are many times where I am in other situations. I don't see the harm in being skeptical.

Being skeptical about what? What new evidence was uncovered that removed skepticism? What are you actually talking about?

 

[Mental Atrophy]

You empower victims by laying a foundation for them so that when shit hits the fan they have a means of recourse, staying "stop" in the moment doesn't quality as a solution for every problem, I wish you and some others would face that fact.

Your position isn't comprehensive enough. In addition to giving victims a means of recourse, we can create a climate where people are comfortable with saying "stop." We can create circumstances where this victim can confront her aggressor without fear of reprisal from her boss, her coworkers, or the prospect of losing a marketing avenue towards success. Post-hoc recourse is only one step towards a solution.

 

[Devolution]

Yeah, I really don't get where people are coming from in this discussion anyway. Surely ignoring his clumsy and sexually explicit advances was enough of a sign that she wasn't buying what he was selling, but apparently mentioning her ongoing divorce was a big green light or something? The mentality is kind of scary honestly, I'm pretty socially inept but that's a whole other level of confusion.

And the "surely she could have done something different" keeps coming even after the dating youtube. Even after it being aired out this is not the first time this individual has crossed the line. It's downright disgusting. This is an obvious case of sexual harassment of a colleague in the industry, and we have people blaming the victim. Even people who purport to be welcoming and great to women. Uhuh.

Your position isn't comprehensive enough. In addition to giving victims a means of recourse, we can create a climate where people are comfortable with saying "stop." We can create circumstances where this victim can confront her aggressor without fear of reprisal from her boss, her coworkers, or the prospect of losing a marketing avenue towards success. Post-hoc recourse is only one step towards a solution.

Not all confrontations are going to happen at that very moment even if you were to create a better climate for women. The onus is not on women in very obvious situations of keeping it professional and friendly to tell a man to stop. That means the screw up has already occurred. It's on the person to not screw up in the first place.

 

[Mental Atrophy]

Not all confrontations are going to happen at that very moment even if you were to create a better climate for women. The onus is not on women in very obvious situations of keeping it professional and friendly to tell a man to stop. That means the screw up has already occurred. It's on the person to not screw up in the first place.

The onus isn't on the victim, but in all practicallity the onus isn't the important part. The important part is ending this type of behavior, and it should be measured and combatted at every angle.

 

[ModBot]

This thread has pretty much run its course. We've learned a lot about status, sexism, and why journalists and semi-retired game developers shouldn't make creepy unwarranted sex comments towards women.