|
Acerbatus posted:I think people get too caught up in scoring points by throwing the bad guys in jail. Like yeah, that's ideal but ultimately even if it never managed to do that it's an important thing for survivors to see they aren't alone. This is what's so maddening about the current dem attitude to MeToo, that response of "you're not alone, we see you, we hear you, and god help you if you're assaulted by someone we like" is almost worse than the wall of silence
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2020 07:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:It does if the argument is that's what started it What? You're saying that because a thing didn't happen at first, but then later on it did, the thing did not happen? What on earth
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2020 20:38
|
|
|
Call Your Grandma posted:would be delightfully surprised if his accuser wasn't treated to a smear campaign before the photo came out. Oh yeah so he was joking, it was just a fun bit, a cheeky laugh right lads, and also she was a republican trying to sink our precious boy Al
|
|
#
¿
Nov 12, 2020 23:24
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:You don't need to throw a loving movement under the bus to prove it. ...we aren't the ones throwing the loving movement under the bus! The loving Dems did! As soon as it came for someone they didn't consider expendable, and unlike Weinstein and Franken there was enough wiggle room for them to downplay and deny what he did, they stopped believing women and went on the attack against a survivor! Timeless Appeal posted:The issue is that the failure to keep Biden accountable is being exaggerated to not only paint the movement as a failure but to retroactively paint the whole movement as as a failure. If a credibly accused rapist can be pushed through the primary by a bunch of people who until his candidacy were avowed supporters of the movement then the movement wasn't worth a drat thing, was it. The second it was time to actually do something difficult it evaporated like morning dew
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 00:40
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:That it was attacked by a lovely political party the minute it was politically convenient is something all emancipatory movements go through. But I think the exercise will have shown a lot of people what can be achieved by self organization, and not all of them will drop that at the whim of the democratic party. I mean let's be clear: what exactly has been achieved by self organization? The two guys to face actual consequences (weinstein and franken) did so because their crimes were basically undeniable and an easy chance for a bunch of political creeps to score some easy points. Without that institutional support the metoo movement is as good as dead, the whole situation being a result of a mass movement for all women getting sidetracked and turned into an exercise in media feminism and picking through the Hollywood barrel for bad apples
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 02:33
|
|
|
To my mind a general push to try and attain some measure of equality and just reduce the amount of poo poo women get for being alive is vital and increasing, but metoo as a movement is dead. It died the moment a bunch of media types and self-proclaimed leaders- the alyssa milanos of the world- were allowed to grab the wheel and wrench it off course from being a generalised mass movement dedicated to highlighting the sheer prevalence of lovely male behaviours and the amount of abuse not being recognized to drive it safely into the cul de sac of "hey, that one guy sucks! Let's get him!" The problem with that kind of "we just need to get rid of the bad apples" thinking is that as soon as the guy in the hot seat is one people don't want to get rid of and think they can justify defending, the entire movement splinters apart because its not longer about "these behaviours are unacceptable and should not be tolerated" its suddenly become "this guys sucks/no I think he's good/he sucks but we need him" etc Which is sad but also makes sense, because choosing one guy who's absolutely a piece of poo poo and getting him fired is cool and fun, but also doesn't really advance society
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 03:18
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:You can look at stuff like the Survivor's Agenda that is pushing the MeToo movement towards systematic changes (Housing, healthcare) that can improve life for survivors and build a better society for the vulnerable. What are these guys actually doing? I went through the website and I found a lot of words about centering voices and calling out and creating spaces but the only concrete thing I could find was a bunch of links to other organizations and series of calls to vote, which strikes me as the usual worthless empowerment rhetoric that ends up boiling down to "we see you, we hear you, now work within the system that hates you" OwlFancier posted:Like, how can the metric of success be the number of high profile scalps claimed and also simultaneously that behaviour be bad? If the metric of success is highlighting lovely behaviour then people talking more about their experiences achieves that whether or not any heads roll for it? I don't know if this is a miscommunication or what but I don't believe this is true- I think that the claiming of high profile scalps is a diversionary tactic, the power structure throwing us scraps. It's cathartic to see these guys get dragged down, but it doesn't actually change anything. The metric of success is not just highlighting this behaviour, it's then actually coming up with ways to force societal change to stop them. Picking off high profile targets one at a time hasn't worked, we need to come up with something more effective, and in the US at least metoo was very successfully turned into a catch-and-kill operation that loudly and performatively singled out some lovely guys, most of whom have slithered back right to where they started by now by a bunch of deeply cynical operators I hate to keep hammering the Biden nail, but organizations like Time's Up immediately jettisoned any legitimacy they might have had as soon as Tara Reade came forward, and then there's the problem you run into with campaigns like the one mentioned above, Survivor's Agenda- it's one thing to claim you're "pushing the MeToo movement towards systematic changes" that would help survivors like free healthcare or social housing but if you're trying to do that with Democratic vote drives you're part of the problem because you're sheepdogging support to a party that fundamentally opposes those things
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 06:20
|
|
|
Sharks Eat Bear posted:I think a lot of the discussion in recent posts rightly points out that accountability for powerful public figures is an excellent, but not EXCLUSIVE, marker of progress/achievement. What makes you think this, and do you believe that "accountability for powerful public figures" is something that has happened Sharks Eat Bear posted:if you don’t believe that the election of mainstream politicians is sufficient to achieve wide scale progressive goals It would be if the mainstream politicians being elected actually had progressive goals but they don't so you're working off a pretty shaky premise some plague rats fucked around with this message at 08:55 on Nov 13, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 08:53
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:I would read the actual 30 page agenda which gives both guiding principles and more specific social and policy changes. I was just looking for an overview, if I have to do loving homework to understand what your movement wants then you're doing it very wrong
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2020 21:40
|
|
|
Timeless Appeal posted:They also provide a three page vision overview. What I'm seeing is a lot of obfuscating language and a proud partnership with the anti-healthcare psychos at CAP, but honestly unless you work for them I'm not really interested in yelling at you about this or in derailing a potentially interesting thread to kick over the minutiae of this one specific NGO
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2020 20:49
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:you've read marx, surely? I because a marxist completely by accident without ever successfully reading a book
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2020 21:21
|
|
|
Alright, I thought it might make an interesting dicussion since this Survivor's Agenda seems like a good microcosm of the self-perpetuating NGO ecosystem I figured I'd actually read the policy document they're putting out and at least to my mind, it's always a bad sign when an organization spends more time listing the various oppression vectors of its members than proposing anything that would alleviate them. There's reams of meaningless bodies and spaces blather, recognising lived experiences, amplifying voices, etc which means nothing and achieves even less. Beyond that there's plenty of things that would be nice- health care for all, housing justice, an end to the myriad inequalities of the 21st century- but the only actual concrete plan of action (creating spaces, listening to voices and so on aside) seems to be "work within the system to elect Dems, and donate to these other NGOs". So basically feeding the ouroboros. This seems like a good example of the way MeToo is going to be used in the future- its going to be professionalised by orgs like this that exist to sheepdog people into the existing infrastructure. Use these survivor-brand NGOs to make sure all the justified outrage about the treatment of women in society is funnelled into the dead end of electoral politics rather than anywhere that would challenge the hideous status quo, collect some high-profile scalps to make it seem like progress is being made and make sure you amplify the voices of these PoC survivors who want you to keep the donations coming in and the energy safely contained. If there was any interest in actually forcing a change the partner list would be less Neera Tanden and more IWW, but union links don't get your founder a speaking slot at the Ozyfest
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2020 04:50
|
|
|
I did not mean to kill this interesting thread with a spicy take, my bad
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2020 22:21
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:tbh I think it's mostly that some people are more interested in declaring the movement dead than anything. There's not really anything to d&d at that point. People are expressing a strongly held belief that I disagree with, drat these are no kind of conditions for a debate!!! What do you think is the best way for the movement to proceed from here?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2020 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 06:33 |
|
|
Well that was quick
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2021 01:31
|
|