Sunday, January 14, 2018

#TimesUp For #MeToo: What Real Equality/Egalitarianism Looks Like

Lately there has been quite some media attention around the "Anti-#MeToo Manifesto" letter that was co-written by five French women: Sarah Chiche (writer/psychoanalyst), Catherine Millet (author/art critic), Catherine Robbe-Grillet (actress/writer), Peggy Sastre (author/journalist) and Abnousse Shalmani (writer/journalist); As well as signed by some 100 other French women.

Every source out there has it's own spin and partial translation on this, but the full context of the letter is very important and worth reading. When taking the letter in it's full context, one sees a true example of egalitarianism in the modern age. (Link To Full Text Here)

It is not too surprising that this letter was presented by French women, in particular. After all, French women are actually taught about men's sexuality, especially in contrast to their own.

It was also not too surprising that so many American women in particular - and mostly Feminists - were 'offended' by this letter. After all, American women are not taught about men's sexuality anymore, especially in contrast to their own - and Feminists devote most of their time to attacking, manipulating or repressing men's sexuality.

You will not find the phrase "Toxic Masculinity" anywhere in the entire French letter because these women are not sexist against men and do not perceive masculinity as being inherently toxic/bad/problematic. American Feminists are often touting that 'women would be/are more tolerant than men' yet their actions do not support this notion, as American women are so intolerant of men's sexuality, simply because of how different it is from women's sexuality, that they often attack it every chance they get while simultaneously advocating or defending their right to 'express' their own sexuality. The #MeToo movement is not much different.

The French women who wrote and signed this letter do not pressure women and men to be the same but they do hold women and men to equal standards. They understand that not all men are attracted to all women and not all women are attracted to all men - and dating can sometimes be a messy, complicated and/or confusing process at times.

A person’s feelings do not trump the facts. A man should not be held to higher standards than women in the same situation just because women tend to have more sensitive and emotional reactions to things than men. 

What do we tell men when they say they feel uncomfortable and “harassed” by women wearing very sexual clothing like see-through dresses, plunging V-necks or mini skirts that barely cover a female’s private parts? Do we tell them that we’re going to hold the women accountable for this because men’s feelings are so important? Or do we tell men to get over it because it’s a woman’s choice to wear what she wants and 'express her sexuality'? That as long as she isn’t actually breaking the law and purposefully and specifically harassing a man, then she isn’t doing anything wrong? So then why wouldn’t it be the same in reverse?

If a man is just asking out a woman, it shouldn’t matter how she feels about it – which is usually determined by her level of attractiveness to the man and not actually his behavior – it should matter whether he crossed the legal line or not, as set by the law if in public; work rules if in the workplace; school rules if at school. 

Comical Example Of A Feelings-Based Accusation

Even worse, many women don't care about what men are feeling and what kind of courage it takes to approach a woman - even outside of a hostile #MeToo environment. They don't care if their own responses to his innocent actions happen to 'harass' him. After all, they are rarely held accountable for their own choices and especially not to the same degree as men are. American women don't even allow men to choose an alternative option with prostitution, forcing men to have to approach them in public, then often degrading him for it.

Why is it seen as "funny" for women to hurt men's feelings or make them uncomfortable yet "oppressive" for men to hurt women's feelings or make them uncomfortable?

The reason why so many people are 'offended' by the French Egalitarianism Letter, is because of the simple fact that it treats men and women as equals; Taking all victims into account - male and female on both sides; accuser and accused - and tries to empower them instead of relying on classic Feminist bullying tactics to keep victims from being 'independent'.

If the #MeToo movement were exempt from lies and/or exaggeration, then why is it being recorded more by the news and social media instead of by the police? If we really cared about helping victims, we'd be using this "trend" to teach them to be more "independent" and stand up for themselves at the time by reporting it, as well as teaching them the difference between 'legal assault' and uncomfortable situations/bad dates; Not teaching them to "join a group" and socially shame the person they're accusing. That's not empowering [real] victims nor is it progressing towards equality.

Before #TimesUp, the #MeToo advocates seemed to only lash out at those who suggested anything outside of embracing 'victimhood'. That's what the French letter was doing, encouraging women to be more independent and aware of innocent mistakes/misunderstandings compared to criminal behavior. Unfortunately, even after #TimesUp, the #MeToo advocates are clearly still lashing out at those who wish to empower victims to not be trapped in a state of extreme vulnerability - particularly when it comes to women.

Let's not forget the fact that some of the men accused in this very wave of accusations have either denied the allegations altogether or said they were exaggerated and/or distorted in some ways. Why should we always "believe women" yet not "believe men" if women and men are equal?

If the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements actually cared about helping all victims, then they would not continue to insist that women are victims to be protected and men are perpetrators to be punished, showing the inherent sexism of both movements. These movements say that "women in male-dominated occupations... are sexually harassed more than women in balanced or in female-dominated ones" yet they don't say that "men in female-dominated occupations... are sexually harassed more than men in balanced or in male-dominated ones" (nor do they say anything about where men are more likely to be harassed). Perhaps this is because they just don't care about male victims or "facts" or "equality"?

Well, the French women who wrote and signed the letter do care about male victims, facts and equality. If women and men are truly to be equal then they must be held to equal standards, not forced to be the same.

The French women are secure enough in their sexuality to admit that some women enjoy being sex objects without it having to be turned into some Feminist or allegedly-sexist issue. Americans should understand this even better than these French women: They live in a mainly-capitalist society and a society that pushes sex everywhere and tells women "it's empowering when you choose to do it to yourself". The reason why so many American women do not understand nor often even care about men's sexuality is because they are too busy being hypocrites, attacking men for "objectifying them" while they get free passes to objectify themselves and even to objectify men. (When women objectify men, it's seen as them "enjoying their sexual liberation"; whereas when men objectify women, it's seen as them "being sexually oppressive". Where's the equality in that?)

Many women are bound to be "bothered" by some man at some point or another, just like many men are bound to be "bothered" by some woman at some point or another. Just because someone is attracted to you, doesn't mean you have to be attracted back or the situation becomes a crime. There are far more appropriate and mature ways to respond to such situations than immediately crying "abuse" or "harassment" - especially among two "equal" people. No one has a right to NEVER be uncomfortable or embarrassed etc. We shouldn't lose sight of what real sexual crimes are compared to innocent mistakes that are a part of life and have no malicious intent.

If someone is complaining that her boss or a co-worker complimented her looks, that is NOT harassment.

If someone is complaining that her boss or a co-worker invited her out to dinner alone, she said yes and he tried to kiss her while they were out together, but she didn't want the kiss and he stopped upon her saying so, that is NOT assault.

If someone is complaining that her boss or a co-worker asked to have sex with her and she said YES or said nothing but complied in her actions (like undressing for him and having sex with him), that is NOT rape.

Yet these are examples of actual allegations lumped into this entire #MeToo scandal and it's not right. Is it not worth it to consider the fact that some of these accusations include stories that sound like regrettable bad dates or regrettable bad decisions on the part of the woman?

Should a man lose his job because he treated a woman as being equal, expecting her to just say something if she didn't like anything or not change her mind after the fact and accuse him of wrongdoing despite initially giving consent? Do those male victims not deserve protection too? Some women use tactics of public sympathy to attack men and that isn't right. Ignoring that is endorsing it.

Petty accusations being thrown into the Me Too movement that are not illegal or inappropriate do more to take away from the real victims and make a mockery of a horrible situation, which is why we need to separate the legitimate accusations from ones that don't actually fit the definitions of "harassment" or "assault" etc.

Many people are trying to do what they see as the best response to the recent #MeToo movement. While many of these responses are coming from a good place, some of these responses are exploiting the 'movement' and/or are too extreme and would be more harmful to society than beneficial. These are the fears that the 105 French women were speaking about.

Not only does the French Egalitarian Letter stand up for both men and women, but it also stands up for culture; Protecting culture from radical extremists who lack the ability to separate a person from their work (especially, it seems, when it's a man or non-Feminist woman).

This entire situation is yet another example of Feminism failing at "women empowerment" and failing at "gender equality". Feminism is based on an ideology of "victimization". So many women - and even many men - don't realize that the 1950s in the USA were not a time of oppression for women and that most American/Western women haven't really been "oppressed" in over a century, if not longer.

So many women in the USA do not give men the deserved credit for all of the traumatic hardship that they have been through and the uncomfortable, inconvenient and unpleasant abundance of tasks that men undertook so that women wouldn't have to. So many Western women do not put their "troubles and worries" in context.

Is it reasonable for women to be so "offended" by the simple fact that a man thought highly enough of them to approach her, yet didn't happen to be suave or attractive etc. enough for her high standards? What a luxurious 'offense' to have to worry about!

Teaching women that they are "victims" and that men had been "oppressing" them "before Feminism swooped in and saved them" makes many women believe that even if they don't agree with Feminism, they still need it around as a barrier to stop men from "oppressing them" - despite the fact that history doesn't support this.

Before Feminism: Women Are Equal To Men & Able To Focus On Their Independent Goals - Whether Career or Family-Oriented;
After Feminism: Women Are Pressured To Be The Same As Men & Bullied Into Focusing On Feminist Goals - Whether Putting Down Men In The Workplace Or 
Putting Down Women In The Home

The Me Too wave is manipulated to reinforce that belief on women, that men are "oppressors" who would "abuse" women if Feminists weren't there to "protect" them. That is simply not true.