Celebrity Creeps Thread (6 Viewers)

She seemed to me, very calm, and logical about this issue, taking in many considerations, including the idea that a lot of our systems are broken, and that we need to overhaul them, or replace them, to reflect true justice. I don't even know what the answers are, I seem to end each day with more questions at the moment....
 
Well Atwood's position is to fix or change the legal system but what are the chances of anything actually changing without a huge amount of public pressure like what's happening on twitter? I think so many people have seen the legal system let them down for so long that they're just not willing to consider it a viable means of anything anymore, they have no reason to trust in it. There's a reason there's a whole culture of women privately warning each other about not being alone with certain men in pretty much every work environment I've ever heard of.

then again:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


I do find it hard to get behind "guilty if accused" as a basic starting point. I've seen people lie in this world, men and women.
 
Last edited:
There are so many bits to 'fix', on a profound level, but I appreciated the Atwood piece. It was reasonable. There is a climate of hectoring without listening, which is a bit of a dead-end. Ultimately, most of us just want a fair society, where people treat each other decently, how we achieve that is another matter, I know....
 
Well Atwood's position is to fix or change the legal system but what are the chances of anything actually changing without a huge amount of public pressure like what's happening on twitter? I think so many people have seen the legal system let them down for so long that they're just not willing to consider it a viable means of anything anymore, they have no reason to trust in it.
Which, to be fair, Atwood deals with in her piece.
The #MeToo moment is a symptom of a broken legal system. All too frequently, women and other sexual-abuse complainants couldn't get a fair hearing through institutions – including corporate structures – so they used a new tool: the internet.
 
Kathy Sheridan has an article in the Times today defending Margaret Atwood but it's behind the paywall. Anyone with an account fancy posting it? :notworthy:
 
Feminism, we have a problem: Why it’s wrong to turn on Margaret Atwood
Subscriber only
Kathy Sheridan: #MeToo is a revolution, and ‘guilty because accused’ has kicked in
about 10 hours ago
Kathy Sheridan


7


image.jpg

If Margaret Atwood hasn’t earned the right to have her opinions treated with due care and respect, where are we?





Margaret Atwood has announced she is leaving Twitter, with biting sarcasm. “Taking a break from being Supreme Being Goddess, omniscient, omnipotent, and responsible for all ills. Sorry I have failed the world so far on gender equality. Maybe stop trying? Will be back later. (Next incarnation maybe.)”

That Margaret Atwood – author of The Handmaid’s Tale, renowned feminist writer, voice of rational discourse, inspiration to millions? Yes, that one. She stands accused, as she puts it, “of conducting a War on Women, like the misogynistic, rape-enabling Bad Feminist that I am”.

Feminism, we have a problem. If Margaret Atwood hasn’t earned the right to have her opinions treated with due care and respect, where are we?

It’s complicated. Catherine Deneuve, one of 343 courageous women to sign a 1971 declaration admitting they had had an abortion when it was still illegal, found herself – with woeful predictability – in deeply undesirable company following her endorsement of an open letter in Le Monde, in which 100 Frenchwomen batted away a subway grope as a “non event” and defended the “freedom to importune”. A world of condemnation has fallen on her, in effect confirming the letter’s assertion that “what began as freeing women up to speak, has today turned into the opposite . . .”

In response, in an even more confusing turn, Deneuve has felt obliged to offer a mea culpa to “all women victims of odious acts who might have felt assaulted by the letter” but nonetheless stands by the original statement.



‘Insidious attempt’
Meanwhile, an online “exposé” of the US actor Aziz Ansari is described by a New York Times staff opinion editor as “arguably the worst thing that has happened to the #MeToo movement since it began in October... The insidious attempt by some women to criminalise awkward, gross and entitled sex takes women back to the days of smelling salts and fainting couches”. Rarely has a debate taken hold so intensely or anxiously in 20- and 30-something circles as the Ansari story, probably because it reflects a messy, repellent reality of modern sexual mores and the alarming ease by which someone’s reputation and livelihood may be crushed in a headline.

This is what makes the evisceration of a clear-eyed feminist such as Atwood all the more untimely.

A fair-minded person would withhold judgment as to guilt until the report and evidence are available for us to see. We are grown-ups. We can make up our own minds
Her plunge to “Bad Feminist” began in 2016 when she signed an open letter calling the University of British Columbia (UBC) to account for its treatment of an accused academic, Steven Galloway. In short, the university had gone public with the accusations in national media before any inquiry, leaving the public – including Atwood – with the impression that he was a “violent, serial rapist”. The inquiry judge concluded there had been no sexual assault but Galloway was fired anyway. Still the attacks on him continued.

“A fair-minded person would now withhold judgment as to guilt until the report and the evidence are available for us to see,” Atwood writes in the Globe and Mail. “We are grown-ups. We can make up our own minds, one way or the other.” This is what has landed her in Bad Feminist country.

Salem witchcraft trials
She transgressed further with her “Good Feminist accusers” by comparing UBC’s proceedings to the Salem witchcraft trials, in which a person was guilty because accused, since the rules of evidence were such that you could not be found innocent. “Guilty because accused” tends to kick in during the “Terror and Virtue” phases of revolutions, she points out, but notes that such revolutions have begun as an understandable response to a lack of justice and “in such times the usual rules of evidence are bypassed”. Enter #MeToo.

On its origins, she is unequivocal. It is a symptom of a broken legal system. Failed by employers, women turned to the internet and “stars fell from the skies” in a massive wake-up call. But – what next?

If the legal system is not fixed, she warns, and if employers do not “houseclean”, “they can expect more stars to fall, and also a lot of asteroids”. But if the legal system is bypassed because it is deemed ineffectual, what happens then? Who will be the new power brokers?

‘Extremists win’
“It won’t be the Bad Feminists like me. We are acceptable neither to Right nor to Left. In times of extremes, extremists win. Their ideology becomes a religion; anyone who doesn’t puppet their views is seen as an apostate, a heretic or a traitor, and moderates in the middle are annihilated”.

It seems alarmist but this is Margaret Atwood. Where does that leave all other confused mortals ? Perhaps with one respondent posting her regret at Atwood’s Twitter stand-down with the following: “So it’s a revolution of sorts. And for a revolution you need extremists. Some of us who can see three steps ahead to the next reaction or counter response, or writers and scholars who want to take a more balanced perspective need to step aside (for a while). I’ll wait there with you.”
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Activity
So far there's no one here

21 Day Calendar

Lau (Unplugged)
The Sugar Club
8 Leeson Street Lower, Saint Kevin's, Dublin 2, D02 ET97, Ireland

Support thumped.com

Support thumped.com and upgrade your account

Upgrade your account now to disable all ads...

Upgrade now

Latest threads

Latest Activity

Loading…
Back
Top