What should happen to the women who ruin the lives of men with false allegations?
50
Spot-on. Speaking as a retired college professor, "pass the trash" is what institutions mostly do. Often it is also demand the perpetrator undergoes counseling--the Catholic church did it; my university did it. How well did counseling work??
Several times, I had the opportunity to find out what happened to sexual predators or serial cheaters once expelled or dismissed from my school. And here is the difficulty:
Out of 2 sexual predators, both moved on to other institutions (in the health fields) multiple times and preyed on victims again and again. It seemed to be addiction for both (I knew them) and their sexual attacks and motivation to humiliate and get away with it was very much about dominance and power over others; sex was secondary, I would say.
Three student cheaters were dismissed in one college major, and the head of the department found out years later that 2 went on and did fine in their jobs, but the other one was repeatedly fired or dismissed for forging medical records, verbally abusing co-workers, and lying.
The problem: How can we identify and sort out the confirmed predators and cheaters from those capable of changing and reforming? My guess the odds are in favor of not changing predatory behavior, but every once in awhile reform is possible.
As we learned in statistics: You may be able predict for a group in a probability sense, but you cannot predict for a single individual in that group.
7
Ms. Baker never mentions that the rapist/victim appearing on TEDTalk were boyfriend/girlfriend at the time of the rape and both were quite intoxicated. Though those facts don't make it any less a crime, omitting them from the story is less than honest.
What "we" do with these men is offer them due process. It's the least any of us deserves.
20
At first, I thought the fall of these powerful predators would have an impact on the president. Would he apologize? Would he resign? I thought it was a strategy leading to the inevitability that President Trump would acknowledge the problem, accepting no guilt, but declare that the only solution would be to give the presidency to Hillary Clinton?
Instead, more bad men are being exposed, while the century long movement to put a woman in the White House is in tatters. I am still baffled that 56% of white women voted for Donald Trump. As a man, I believed it was my duty to elect Hilary. I urge the #me too movement to focus on the real issue – elect a woman for president.
3
There can be no forgiveness without contrition. In other words, sexual predators must face their victims and make full restitution. Predators must publicly apologize and take full responsibility for their callous disregard of others. Nothing will change in the absence of real world consequences for harassment and assault. For those predators with no self-awareness, no empathy and no remorse (such as the college predator whining about his sanctions), the end game he suggested is just fine with me. I'm sure his victims considered the same - for profoundly different reasons.
12
"Campus activists, seeking an option somewhere between sending their assailants to prison and nothing, demanded the victim-centered alternatives to the criminal justice system that Title IX was meant to provide."
Title IX was never designed to "provide alternatives to the criminal justice system." It was designed to stop discrimination based on gender in educational programs (higher and lower). Worse, suggesting there should never be, "victim-centered alternatives" to the criminal justice system, when the issue at hand is a crime, is beyond absurd.
Sexual assault is a crime and it should be reported and investigated as such. We wouldn't create "victim-centered alternatives" for robbery or theft or aggravated assault victims, much less allow university flacks to make decisions on the validity of the facts of the case.
No one in higher education is adequately trained or experienced enough to sit in judgment of a sexual assault case, much less mete out appropriate punishments. The only place for this is in the criminal justice system.
15
Despite all the political conflict of our time, there seems to be one thing that the Left and the Right agree on: There is no need to make the punishment fit the crime. Bad is Bad, and all Badness should be punished equally.
The Right embraced "3 strikes" laws that required 25 year sentences for stealing a bottle of beer. After all, we shouldn't coddle criminals.
The Left gets outraged when anyone tries to point that there are moral differences between rape and harassment, and not everyone's life should be ruined for every sexual transgression. After all, we shouldn't coddle rapists.
14
Impressive, morals and mutual respect is out... callous liars, sexual predators are in. With Trump are the Oval Office, these entitled sexual predators feel empowered. Cosby has been convicted of his sexual crimes, what about Weinstein? And the rest? Because they are white and powerful no women is willing to take them to court? TNYT article stating that prosecuting these sexual predators would be almost impossible... is that the reason? The entire system is set up to protect men, particularly white men of their sexual misconducts? Abhorrent.
4
Why should they get a comeback? They should keep their heads down and just disappear from public view. Sub-mediocre men for the most part, who needs them?
10
It is still very much a man's world and as a result we as a society continue march ever closer to the end of everything. Crimes against women are crimes against us all.
6
Well known sexual predator and creator of the world's worst work environment, Donald J. Trump is NOT mentioned at all in this piece, but Tom Ashbrook who was fired for creating a hostile work environment (NOT for sexual harassment) - which seems to have occurred primarily during the period when his wife was dying from cancer does appear? What's wrong with this picture?
14
What do we do with the men who lose families, friends, jobs and reputations over false or exaggerated or imagined misbehavior? What do we do with Al Franken?
Re-read "The Crucible"; witch hunts never end well for anybody, even when there are real witches (O'Reilly, Weinstein, my uncle Mel) to be punished.
17
Will there be a movement to ostracize women who have raised/encouraged/enabled young men to behave the way these older men have behaved?
9
I think there are two related but ultimately distinct conversations. As we all know, there are a disturbing number of powerful, wealthy men who have harassed female subordinates. They are likely going fine financially and in some cases will find their way back into the public eye.
From a numbers standpoint, however, the relatively anonymous middle manager is the more common example of the harasser. That person won't be able to retire but need some kind of work to survive. If our answer to them is that we don't care what you do or where you go as long as it's at a lower economic and social status than the job you were fired from then we are saying, implicitly, that we also don't care what happens to the women he may work with at that lower status job.
My point is that some kind of rehabilitative process that includes allowing someone back into society seems like a better solution not just for the perpetrators but also for potential future victims.
8
Restitution, restitution, restitution!!!
2
We must create a process that affords these men and opportunity to return to society, regardless of their wealth. How it is actually applied must be dependent on each situation. If we don't give them the opportunity, then we are compounding the hurt and damage they created by banishing them forever and increasing the possibility of more psychological damage, anger and suicides in a society already plagued by these issues.
Real contrition for their acts. Prosecution if they committed a crime. Reparations to the people they damaged (if their victims are amenable). Counseling. After these steps society will let them know through the work they can obtain and the social media response what is thought of their rehabilitation efforts.
6
One doesn’t need to be an apologist for date rapists and sexual harassers to recognize the societal good in allowing people to get educations and have jobs once they have paid their debt to society and served their court-ordered sentences. This is as true for sexual crimes as for all others. I am sometimes sorry to see my fellow progressive feminists make this one exception to their commitment to criminal justice reform. (I put Uber-wealthy celebrities in a different category because they do not need to work anymore.)
4
The answer seems obvious for all of these men: switch parties. Nearly all of perpetrators mentioned are true-blue democrats. Clearly republicans (male and female alike) have no qualms with such behavior. In fact, one could argue such qualities mark the ascendant characteristics of a true American.
4
The actions of these men are to be condemned. But are they, as persons, any more despicable than many of the rest of us who practice our vices to the detriment and even endangerment of others? Hate the sin, not the sinner.
1
Two women. both professional comics, came to C. K Lewis room. They were there for fun and games. C. K. masturbated in front of them and the affront destroyed his career. Not rape, nor a violent assault, nor a dangerous or threatening act. A troubled man. A pathetic act. Whatever he has done since to help himself means nothing to the avengers. His punishment is to be lifelong. The women? Up for three-way-sex. The little darlings are gone.
Not"Bad Men." Sad men. This piece: one sided and dangerous,
22
Over half the internet is porn. What distortion of an appropriate relationship between a man and a woman. Adults, teens, and your priest/rabbi have viewed this trash: attitudes develop as a result.
Madison Ave.; sex sells everything. Have you ever seen average-looking men and women in ads? No. They are often portrayed as sex objects, to the point of obscenity. I think of a hamburger commercial of recent history.
When we don't talk to our kids, they get this picture of sexuality as defined as sexual objects. Even in my generation; I only knew what a vagina looked like from an illustration in Grey's Anatomy shared behind the garage with other boys as a pre-teen. My parents told me nothing; as many of my friends experienced. Mothers and fathers: how you treat and instruct your boys to treat others, especially women, is critical. Behind every sexual predator are parents.
There was no guide or rule book in developing a relationship with a member of the opposite gender. I treated by dates as I wished to be treated, occasionally hormones got in the way. I was awkward, made mistakes, and missed opportunities because I was "too shy". We absorb our parents treatment of each other as a template for our own gender roles as adults. That's scary if our parents were dysfunctional.
Many parents don't want sex education in their schools. Yet apparently they want kids to learn it in the back seat of a car. Kids are going learn it; whether from you or others.
3
Lauer, Louis C K, Charlie Rose, the list of transgressors has become long and winding, need us but we certainly don’t need them.
4
They may, indeed, "want a comeback, " but the political tides have changed. I do not think an investor is going to take the considerable risk of floating their projects...at least for a long time.
Instead, their fate will be exactly what they inflicted on their victims...to be consigned to loneliness and a silence where no matter how much you flail, implore,and talk...no one believes you. Some of them, after a monumental effort (again, just like their victims) may climb their way back, but their careers will be forever changed by this (again, in exactly the way their victims' lives were changed). There's almost something Shakespearean in that justice.
I say this as someone who has noted from the onset that we DO need to exert caution, uphold the precept that one is innocent until proven guilty, and who has urged us to use the even hand and tempered measures some of those accused never did.
The real impact of this moment is on the future. If a new generation of young men learn that there is zero place in the workplace or anywhere, but especially the workplace, for sexual harassment then we'll be an appreciably better society for all. That change can be hastened if we address the elephant in the room...sexism itself.
Sexual harassment, dire as it is, is just one tentacle of the creature that drives so many terrible injustices and outcomes...sexism, a mindset, agenda and juggernaut that has fueled millennia of injustices. End it and sexual harassment has no ground.
4
The only people that want these men "back" are the perpetrators.
3
Because we reproduce sexually, there is no more important topic than male-female relations. I am a man. I think progress starts with talking openly and educating young men about proper sexual conduct without emasculating them. Alcohol will always be a wildcard. The high profile celeb guys are barely the tip of the iceberg. But they have also created an opportunity for broader society. We must seize it now and run with it as far and fast as we can. No family is untouched by sexual abuse.
2
I'll tell you what I will do. I will boycott any advertiser that supports any of these creeps.
6
This article is disturbing, and I hope the author sincerely means “we need more discussion”. There is a very wide spectrum of behaviors that can be termed predatory, as mothers with sons have learned as well as fathers with daughters. It cannot be denied by rational people that there are predatory women as well as predatory men. I had the feeling that any nineteen-yr.-old frat kid who drunkenly groped a woman equally abandoned to common sense was open to the same standard of condemnation as a child- molesting priest transferred from parish after parish. No, these situations are not equal. You quote a young man kicked off campus for sexual conduct and accuse him of being “increasingly resentful and closed off to change” although all he said was, “ ....didn’t want me to participate in campus activities, then I thought they didn’t want me to graduate, Now they don’t want me to have a job or be a part of society. Do they want me to commit suicide?” This is not an expression of refusal to change, this is pure rational fear- and despair -talking. Perhaps the the men felled by #metoo would like to tell everyone that they are not resentful and they are open to change. Would that be OK with you? Perhaps they could do this without earning money, but of course rehabilitation might ensue and perhaps you do not approve of that, as they might then have jobs and be part of society. We do not want sexual misdemeanors legislated minutely, or we will have the Taliban.
14
If Charlie Rose does an interview show I'm watching it. Garrison Keillor too.
6
The complexity of some (I repeat, some) of these situations is highlighted by the fact that we have one in which a victim and her rapist became friends and collaborators on a book. There is no one-size-fits-all remedy or solution. Men should behave better, of course. If an actual crime has been committed, it should be prosecuted. Behavior that falls short of being prosecutable has to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. How is it so easy for a handsy professor to get hired again? Don't schools check references? Don't former employers face liability if they suppress information about former employees? In the end, if Charlie Rose (for example) is free of legal difficulties and wants to go on TV again, it's up to the market to decide whether he can or not. If viewers want to watch him, and if advertisers want to pony up money, then that's that. It's not up to you or me, or society at large, to keep him off the air.
1
What do we do with these guys? Simple. We don't let them back in. They all have substantial wealth to live out their days if they manage to stay out of jail. The punishment that they can't seem to accept and therefore the one that carries the most tooth for all of them is to be out of their professional environment. It's the fitting punishment.
4
Another underestimation by men. They think women forget and forgive.
Let them return. They will be ignored by women and perhaps by many decent men who get it. Let them embarrass themselves when they’re not watched or have audiences. Let them go broke. Matt Lauer was not missed on The Today show less than 24 hours after they he got the boot. Surprise, Matt!
Actually in some ways that would even be more satisfying. It would eliminate their fantasy about believing they really could still make it if they only had the guts to come back.
Ain’t gonna work. The wishes of strength for women of today, from our mothers who may have stood back, is coming true.
5
I hope so, but have doubts. Just consider the many women who support Trump!
2
Sexual harassment and sexual discrimination are about the perpetrator wielding power over the targeted person. I believe the appropriate punishment is to make them experience powerlessness. An appropriate sentence for Charlie Rose and others might be to have to work in a job with no power and have to live on the salary. To be treated like Kleenex by managers and have to survive on minimum wage. To experience life as a ditch digger, secretary, fast-food worker, custodian, or other job routinely looked down on in our society. To be on the receiving end of the unjustified assumption that they are "less than". The length of the sentence can be adjusted based on the severity of the offense. personally, I'd recommend a 1-year minimum.
A sentence of "powerlessness" deals with the "pass the trash" problem, but keeps non-rapists out of prison. We don't have to pay to feed and house them in prison, since they will have jobs.
Maybe some will even develop empathy and come to understand what they did was wrong. But, even if they don't, we have the satisfaction of seeing the punishment fit the crime.
1
How many of these men have apologized or made any attempt to show regret for their actions? Obviously when a felony has been committed, they should be charged, but there are lesser forms of misdeeds that might be forgiven with sincere offers of apologies to the victims as well as good intentions showing a willingness to change their behavior.
As a female, I was surprised that these men are trying to "get back in the game" so soon after their shameful behavior. I guess I overlooked the fact that they must have a certain level of insensitivity in order to SHOW such behavior.
3
And, of course, the insensitivity of the masses of people who thrive on salacious news!
1
We could start by changing the question from "What do we do with these bad men?" to "what do we do with these men who have done bad things?"
9
"Is there a way to explore possibilities of redemption that don’t put more of a burden on the people harmed in the first place?" I can think of 2 former public servants (Al Franken, Eliot Spitzer) whose service advanced the public interest but who are no longer championing the public good because there has been no consideration of severity and evidence of remorse for their unacceptable behavior. Kirsten Gillibrand, are you listening?
4
Obviously, these perps and those who support them don't think they've done anything serious enough to warrant a disruption of their lives. Sure, they've disrupted their victims' lives, but there's one set of rules for them, and another for everyone else.
It's such unconscionable behavior that the majority of people are going to be repulsed by it. Keep it out in the light, don't back down, and don't forget.
I don't know how someone raises a boy to become a person who rapes or assaults. But someone needs to stand up in front of the orientation presentation at college campuses and be honest: "This campus is not like international waters or Vegas where what you do stays here. If you choose to pursue non-consensual sex, it can follow you throughout your life. It's an action that will reflect on you, and how people including employers assess you. Decide whether you want to believe your friends or frat brothers, or us. Don't complain that we did not warn you."
1
When Obama was elected, and some were naively bandying the term “post racial”, few it seemed were talking about the reaction. There are numerous reasons for Trump's election; but, I disagree with the notion that it wasn't, in part, a reaction to the Obama presidency.
I know a woman who is a victim of sexual assault, yet still supported our geriatric teenaged predator in chief. Madness.
There are some men who break laws of society, and rules of workplace. There are millions more who stay within those boundaries, but in their minds, and male social circles, have the same attitudes as the abusers.
There will be a reaction to #MeToo. Our leadership now consists of the worst possible people at the worst possible time. They are almost entirely male.
This opinion piece is an important start, but, we need to talk about those other men too. Major change rarely happens quickly, and when it does, the reaction is often very bad.
1
Truth and Reconciliation Model..... the only way... and it takes a long time.... there's no instant fix.
2
Excellent point !!!
2
You can't discuss this currently because there is no due process in #me too, it's mostly about retribution and punishment, there is never any mention of apology of the accused followed by forgiveness, attempts to change behavior, or any judgement of the severity of the offense. You can be tried, perp walked and convicted by a newspaper article, or by unverified claims from 30 years ago. Then your career, no matter how stellar, no matter how many people defend you, it's basically over. It's absurd and currently has turned into a witch hunt, massive hysteria run rampant, worse than McCarthyism. An unwanted peck on the cheek can now turn into a capital offense. How absurd. The vindictiveness of these women is on clear display for all. Sure there are some really bad people here, and they do deserve the punishment, but most do not. What's telling is the fact that almost none of the offenses rise to the level of criminality, and will never see a courtroom. That's because our law provides due process to someone accused of wrongdoing in a courtroom. #me too has decided they will just bypass that. They are judge, jury and executioner, they think they have the right to remove anyone they designate from society without any hint of fairness. This is not a movement that will lead to constructive change, it will just create backlash where women will again be excluded from any work situation where a complaint might arise.
It's already happening in boardrooms as we speak. Stay tuned.
10
This is an important question to be addressing, and it is disturbing to see developments like the one described in a March 15 article by Nick DeSantis in the Chronicle of Higher Education:
Education Dept. Stops Providing Details on Resolved Title IX Cases
It demonstrates that there are plenty of people--including women like Betsy DeVos--who are still willing to aid and abet sexual harassers and predators. And what some commenters on this article fail to understand is that the men (and women) who "merely" harass create the context and cover for more serious offenses, along with the confusion that supports and even encourages predatory and violent behavior against others. Why don't they get that? Campaigns to rehabiltate, redeem, and "forgive" the allegedly "petty" transgressors want to give the impression that this discussion is about sex. It isn't. It's about power--it's about whether our society will uphold and enforce the principle of equal treatment under the law for all.
2
The Federal government has been "passing the trash" for years, removing incompetent staff who may have committed a variety of egregious acts including sexual misconduct, and transferring them to other facilities either off site or out of state. These high level transfers lead to missed promotional job opportunities for hard working Feds in those places. It is a disgusting way to do business and happens with such frequency that from most, the fact simply rates an eye roll from employees.
Even convicted felons have a right to make a living after serving their time. These men were fired, but that does not mean they will never be useful to society again. People do evolve, i.e., AMJoy, and can learn and change. Maybe we need as a nation an open discussion about workplace culture, and how how men and women can work to make it a better place. I know many women who have done terrible things (not of a sexual nature) to make life miserable for others. It seems to me that power can be toxic and it manifests itself in different way.
4
What is unfortunately wrong with this article is that it is again written by an educated and insightful woman...not an insightful man. The problem with male misbehavior at all ages is tolerance and tacit support from other men.
It starts as youngsters with situations like that faced by my friend's son, an upbeat and funny Asberger's eight-year old, who was taunted by a same age bully, finally punched and shoved to the ground while the victim's friends hung back. (When at last the school took measures, both the bully and absent friend wrote letters of apology. Sincere or coerced? Permanent impact or not?)
It continues while other "better men" remain silent, for example at the respected university where I attended graduate school. Example is one winter's day in a Women and Work seminar (no interests men were there), led by a woman professor who would later advise Presidents. One student finally sighed and said, "When are we going to address the 800 lb. gorilla? In this department three faculty are accused of harassment or assault. How does the predominantly male faculty respond? By being gun-shy of female protégées and aiming sure they don't have closed-door brainstorming and advising sessions with female students." BTW: Same "good guys" elected one of the accused harassers as department chair.
Do women (or other vulnerable folks) White Knights to defend them against bad male behavior? No, just the same friendship or collegial respect they expect from each other.
3
If a man had written this article, he would have been accused of mansplaining. The fact that this article even considers the possibility of forgiveness for these men, would have gotten any male author pilloried for "not getting it." The fact that the author is not only a woman, but a women heavily involved in investigation of harassment is the only thing that makes it possible to write something this nuanced. Even so, their are plenty of commenters here who see only one side of her nuanced position, accusing her of being either too harsh or too lenient.
4
Have you considered the fact that some "bad" men actually accepted their "badness" and turned a new leaf ? Or is that out of the question or thought process. While it may be true that some bad men will always remain bad, it is possible that some may actually reform themselves. Reform is a very dicey thing. Just ask the many prison reform advocates, who deal with real criminals put away in prison. Reconciliation is a good option but getting a 100% good result would be very difficult. Has any society solved crime totally???
2
"What do we do with these men?"
It seems that the Left no longer believes in the law and due process..."We" now run a vigilante culture where newspapers, bloggers, and random Tweets provide the prosecution and jury, while punishment is allotted by sponsors and employers afraid to resist the digital cloud of accusation and innuendo...Peoples' lives are destroyed without any recourse for appeal.... In the search for "social justice", the law is simply too slow and rutted... "We" demand "justice"...Time to recall the old lawyer's saw: "Justice will be allotted in the Next World; here we have the Law." To which I would add, a world which skips over the law to get to justice ends up with neither: just the howling of outrage and demands for vengeance...
7
The worst offenders in this group abused their position of power for years, if not decades, to abuse and prey on women. Those close to them and those in a position to stop them knew what was going on but did not. It was the combination of power and invulnerability that allowed them to abuse others. Now that their behavior is public knowledge we should not as a society restore that power and invulnerability to them again. It will not go well and is an insult to everyone that they abused.
All these men were given positions that are a rare privilege to hold. There are very many talented and capable people, men and women, who could occupy the roles and use the resources that these men want to use to step back into the spotlight. Why would we spend resources and give exceedingly rare positions of power, influence and public visibility to men who have already proven that they will misuse and abuse it? Let that go to fresh faces who don’t see their positions as a tool for pushing their fantasies of sexual dominance on women who work for or around them.
Let them find new jobs. Ones that don’t put them in positions of power. Ones where the serve others and are well supervised. Is it so unreasonable that they live like ordinary people after showing that they cannot handle responsibility and power?
1
The author says "a real conversation about what should happen to these men." These men are everyone, and they are created by our culture, by mothers and fathers, and media. What happens to "these men" happens to all of us. If we women decide for some kind of collective ostracism and punishment, the response will be forceful. The kind of behavior you're including in this conversation is not just rape, it's the harassment and subtle degradation that has been tolerated, encouraged, and supported for years. Most men accused of harassment likely feel like they were simply doing what's always been accepted, and thus nothing wrong. You punish that, the feeling is deep injustice and a willingness to fight back. You're right, we need a conversation, not just a "take down." We need cultural change that engages both men and women, or it won't be pretty.
1
Let's take a look at Mel Gibson whose racist rants and behavior made him a pariah . . . for a while. He's back and nominated for an Oscar the last time around. The memory of the world seems to be surprisingly short and generously forgiving of white males.
3
Re #MeToo stimuli, do women bear any responsibility for the advent of this movement? The question occurs, in what way does society allow men to be overtly sexual in public? Bear in mind, I'm not criticizing any such fashion trend (as depicted in the video linked below). Just asking sincere questions.
https://pagesix.com/video/underboob-is-spilling-out-all-over-hollywood/?...
1
Charlie Rose and Tom Brokaw should remain on the dustbin heap with the rest of them!
4
It’s not “These men” who we need to change, although it would be nice if we could. Rather, it is ourselves and the institutions that give them the prestige, celebrity (yes, professors are celebrities in their own small world), and power over others that we need to change. As a society, we must say “Time’s Up” and refuse to hire people with reprehensible records of abusing others, refuse to “pass the trash” by giving falsely positive recommendations, challenge abusive behaviors when we see them, and celebrate those who challenge abusive behaviors. If all this happened, then “These men” would either change or be shunned from society.
Right now and despite the #MeToo movement, we actually celebrate and empower “These men.” We must change our own behavioral and institutional responses to them.
What do you mean “we” - what do we do?
American democracy and our Constitution were not based #metoo. We have a system of justice that #metoo has completely bypassed. Everyone in our democracy has a right to her or his day in court, which is being denied in wholesale fashion, dragging down our country and its principals. If Bajer’s article is journalism, where are the voices of men?
Workplace harassment is an equal opportunity activity affecting men much more than women and perpetrated on a percentage basis more by women bosses against both men and women. Women also are sexual harassers although obviously in different forms than men. A friend who resisted his female boss’ advances was forced out by “a woman scorned”. Many women prefer to work for men.
Those who complain about Trump’s “dictatorship” need only look as far as #metoo’s authoritarianism, which is far more dangerous to our country and civilization.
6
To these men, if you read this:
No. Don't even try to come back.
You had it all. You threw it all away. It happens. Live with it.
Go away.
3
Where is the outrage from #MeToo about the sexual harasser who has a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court? It's time to demand that Clarence Thomas resign and acknowledgment of their misogyny from the Senators who disparaged Anita Hill's testimony and confirmed his nomination.
3
Great piece by Katie J. M. Baker.
Yet, she addresses the issue of sexual harassment and assault mostly in the context of privileged men (and mostly white men) such as celebrities, high level executives, professors and school teachers.
Pre-industrial ages most crimes were committed locally and dealt with locally since people didn't have the wherewithal to just up and leave their community. The community would judge a course of redemption or shunning, the criminal and their family then having to deal with the consequences.
Post-industrial age but pre-internet age, 'passing the trash' became possible because a non-convicted offender, with some degree of complicity from the impacted entity, could move on and start life anew, including continuing their abusive ways. We don't need that.
Now, in the internet age, we need to go back to some degree of community involvement in providing means to prevent recidivism - and this goes for many types of crimes, not just sexual assaults.
What we really need to start looking at is the 'rule of law', in other words the harsh, black-or-white approach our elected leaders use in writing laws and the manner in which the judiciary interprets and lays down the law.
We may not need to go as extreme as 'let's kill all the lawyers' but we do need to have a legal and justice system that is more reflective of the will of the people, not just a distillation of pure logical reasoning.
In twelve step programs, a key component is making amends. Personally. Taking responsibility for how you harmed and hurt others while addicted to alcohol or drugs. I absolutely don't mean to imply (and thus pardon) these acts as the result of sexual "addiction". But emerging from what amounts to a "time out" and thinking the penance has been completed is wrong and should not be tolerated. Personal amends to victims and, as the author rightly suggests, using their money and whatever voice they have left to help the many women who are victimized on a daily basis far from the media spotlight, is needed before anyone starts to talk about a comeback.
One form of restorative justice developed by an "indigenous" community is found in Sharia Law. ( I put "indigenous" in quotes because Islam, like Christianity, is an imperialist culture that imposed itself on a variety of indigenous cultures.) Sharia does not have the West's distinction between Civil and Criminal cases. Even murder is considered to be an offense against the victim's family, not against the state. And if the murderer asks forgiveness from the victim's family, the family can chose to grant it, and the murderer is freed. Sharia would consider the reaction of the woman who made the Tedtalk to be warped, but admirable.
To reduce Sharia to the cutting off hands and the beating of wives, is like reducing Anglo-Saxon to the "rule of thumb" that permits wife beating, and the fact that the West did not grant married women the right to own property until the 20th century. There is much we can learn from Sharia.
2
sorry for my sloppy proofreading. I meant to say "Sharia would consider the reaction of the woman who made the Tedtalk to be NOT warped, but admirable."
There is a certain sick cruelty exposed here. Clearly, many of these predators have behaved badly towards their prey, some cruelly. In return, this "lynch mob" responds by proposing cruel, sometimes life long, punishments to all no matter the particular transgression, some quite serious, but others minor. Many who have responded to this "movement" seem to relish in the infliction of maximum pain. I don't see how that is progress. But I do detect an underlying hatred that is troubling.
3
Nature's imperative for reproduction is very strong. Women spend untold effort and money($billions on hair, make up perfume, look at the ridiculously unfunctional clothes and shoes) to look attractive to males and then get upset when they respond.
Or women do dumb things and blame other. There was the woman who shared a hotel room with Harvey Weinstein let him get in bed with her (he was completely naked) and claims he "raped" her. Or the job applicant who accompanied Charlie Rose to his country house went with him to his bedroom while he was to change his pants and then she pretends to be be upset he made a pass at her. That these women are getting money from these guy is the real scandal.
2
Television, movies, the stage are all privileged public forums where talented people vie for a limited number of positions open to hawk their wares, whether these be jokes, commentary or hosting a morning news show.
The men who were accused of and admitted to sexual misconduct should not have the privilege of appearing in public again. Their credibility is shot.
But more to the point is this: For every Charlie Rose there is a Lee Cowan, Anthony Mason and a ton of others just as talented and knowledgeable. For every Matt Later there is a Willie Geist and many other potential morning hosts waiting for their chance. And how many chefs and comedians can cook as well as Batali or make us laugh as much as C.K ? I'd say plenty.
Why we need to reward these reprobates with a comeback is beyond me when there are so many terrifically talented people waiting in the wings. They had their shot and the blew it, big time.
They need to fade away not expose themselves again, in more ways than one.
3
What a stupid question of a title. "We" don't do anything with these men. They have already paid with their reputations, loss of jobs, and estrangement of friends, colleagues, and wives, all without due process. "These men" try to rebuild themselves. Now, imagine the backlash for an article, say about predatory women teachers, if there was the same title only with the word "women" in it. Do you see the double standard? At some point there must also be forgiveness. Otherwise, we steadily descend into a culture of victimhood, accusations, indignation, and hatred.
6
Your assumption is off the mark. Women don’t like women who abuse power for the same reasons they don’t like men who abuse power. Our attitudes about abuse of power and the consequences of abuse of power need to be addressed now or none of the exposure will matter. Our concerns are not like muted to the abuser. They must now include enablers who contributed to the length, scope and depth of abuse. Those who failed to their jobs as protectors of the civil rights of others must also be included in the search for systemic changes that could prevent or end the abuse. The US has a problem with disproportionate bias against victims and in favor of perpetrators of abuse. To address this fundamental concern we must expand the focus and transform attitudes before we can establish transformative consequences regardless of the gender of perpetrators.
You are right. The Avengers want lifelong revenge. Not an ounce of humanity, Yours shone through to make us think in a way this writer could not. Thank you.
3
The idea of Charlie Rose shopping a new show about interviewing other serial sexual harassers and rapist utterly disgusts me. Unfortunately, I also have to admit that I would thoroughly enjoy a 'roundtable' discussion with the Epstein posse (Trump, Bill Clinton, and Prince Andrew)
2
Fellow gals, take a self-defense class. Teach a guy a lesson he won't forget. And mothers, teach your sons manners. And your daughters to present themselves as deserving of respect. And don't date or marry an uncivilized guy. Woman power works.
3
What about invaders who devastated, looted and conquered nations and enslaved, raped and beheaded millions, including kings and queens/religious symbols and preachers in the past? How should they be remembered: brutes or Emperarors?
2
WHY are none of these men facing a trial like Bill Cosby?
3
There is plenty these guys can do... someone has to sell shoes, etc.
1
Wow, I mean, wow! Is everyone really going to waste time and energy fretting about what happens to these men? That speaks loads about how far we have to go before this problem is thoroughly addressed. Let's see: (1) they need to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, (2) they need to go away. Maybe find a position at the local Walmart. Like so many woman who've been victimized, fired, demoted and left their jobs to get away from these creeps, who have ruined women's careers. How about we focus all this energy people want to expend, trying to prop up the patriarchy, on the women who were wronged by them. What's happened to them, and how can we help them move on and thrive in a world where, it's hoped, these predator types are becoming few and far between.
1
These folks won't be staging a comeback on my dime. I never understood (on the basis of intrinsic talent) why they rose to prominence in the first place. I always read them as uniformly shallow, insincere, arrogant, overweening, and presumptuous.
The attraction? I don't get it. There are thousands and thousands of people that are infinitely more talented, not to mention honest and committed to the pursuit of the truth. Jeremy Scahill? Terry Gross? Glenn Greenwald? Katy Tur? and at least half a dozen students currently attending Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.
As for Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, Tom Ashbrook, let alone Hannibal Lecter Weinstein, etc. - they're gone and as far as I'm concerned they can and should stay gone.
4
Huh?
We use terms such as penitentiary and incarceration. Has rehabilitation no place in those felled by metoo? I am not very sympathetic to these people, but shame on us if we cannot define a trial, and a sentence.
What do we do?
The same as we do each day with people who complete a sentence and leave a penitentiary free women and men. Some of them are rapists, murderers, perpetrators of violent crime, and white collar criminals that have swindled a lot of innocent people of the life saving. We shrug because they have paid their dues.
Is it galling to us that there was no sentencing here, just the temporary removal of access to the privileges afforded by the fame of these people? I.e., something many (or most) may get back in time and due course?
What these people did was criminal in a society that glorifies these crimes, winks at them, and blames the victim wholeheartedly. What do we do with ourselves?
What we do with the bad men? Well, first of all, we don't reward them with our attention. Ever.
3
Some are bad men and some are men who have done bad things. An important distinction. Powerful positions, wealth, celebrity status feeds into the ego and self importance escalates. We need to educate men and women, boys and girls. Many of the men pictured continued their actions b/c their victims were not able to, or chose not to, say something. Some chose career over justice. That's a choice no one should have to make and it was their choice to remain silent. The harder choice for the individual may have been to come forward. Educating girls and women to speak up and not tolerate harassment, at whatever cost, is important. And educating the men who remain silent about their boss, colleague, to speak up etc is equally important. As for what to do with these men, an excellent question and again, educate them. Work with them, therapy, restrictions when returning to work; whatever it takes for them to learn how to be respectful of women. And then, if they fail again, consequences.
7
Do sexual abuse and rape victims feel more empowered now to report the crimes to legal authorities much sooner than later, if ever? This will save many future victims from these serial perpetrators.
3
Our society will not change, we will continue to "elect"men like Donald Trump to office and women like Marsha Blackburn and Diane Black continue to support them.
2
Sad to see that this movement is just like the Maoists. If you don't want to be near these guys then don't work there. You cannot rewrite evolution.
4
That means many women can’t work many many places and forfeit careers . It’s all over in every kind of workplace. It’s not women’s fault that these men are predators. Women should not have to eliminate opportunity because of men acting like animals . You are blaming the victim
Sexist behavior is not a new topic, for men OR women.
If they committed a crime then prosecute them.
If they didn't, get over it.
4
Excuse me for saying this but if someone grabbed my wife the wrong way she would promptly break their nose. As the song say "women are smarter", ruining these men's careers for being pigs is a one sided jam. There are equal numbers if women who have married, slept with, manipulated, or even destroyed men with their sexuality. Grow up or you will have the puritans Christian's (American Taliban) demanding our women wear burkas to avoid all temptation. Just stop it.
17
Wow! Illuminating. Indeed, no one’s discussed what to do with all the “bad men”. It’s true that they’re a collective hot potato that just gets tossed around. What to do indeed. This discussion needs to stay open.
2
Thanks, S. Hall, for wise solution.
First, there's no "we" outside the justice and electoral systems; i.e., there is no other way for society to act in concert effectively to address an issue.
Second, outrage usually leads to revenge, rather than justice, and is a notoriously blunt instrument that can cause as much or more harm than that which provoked it (see the US invasion of Afghanistan in reaction to 9/11). Also, because it's an emotional rather than a well-considered reaction, it's almost impossible to sustain as a spur to action.
It seems the most effective and long-term way of improving attitudes around sexuality is education of the young--especially around the onset of puberty, which is the most disturbing, and for many, confusing and terrifying, biological event in one's life.
It needs to be done skillfully and positively, in order to empower and encourage young people that they can ride the powerful energies that seem to be taking them over, rather than being ridden by them.
This may not satisfy those looking for revenge or for quick fixes to what they see as existing threats, but I'm confident that it will eventually lead to less sexual misbehavior and criminality--and perhaps even to happier sex lives in general.
9
As long as Donald Trump escapes consequences for his sexual harassment and unwanted groping of women, how do we expect the culture to change? The leader of our country has faced no punishment for his disgusting behavior and indeed is still widely admired by a significant proportion of the country, so I'm a little cynical that we're seeing a wave of permanent change.
11
He's still lying and fighting in court and refuses to acknowledge anything.
1
Many of the comments here exemplify why we need the #MeToo movement. They belittle the effect the actions of these men have had on the women they've harmed. After all, it's only "locker room talk" until you or one of your loved ones is a victim.
7
Let them go work at Walmart or something. How about focusing on helping the women whose lives and careers were destroyed by them? And the thousands of other women whose stories will never be told.
1
Well, all those men can be rounded up and subjected to trial by tattooing. By chemical tattooing, not by branding with red-hot iron. Those whose skin does not accept the tattoo are pronounced innocent.
This will be like the call of a Catholic bishop in the early 1300s during the Crusade against the Cathars, "Kill all, God will recognize his". Perhaps the tattooing proposed above would aid Allmighty's work.
3
Banishment has a certain appeal...
3
If we as a people do not believe in redemption we should close all houses of worship, all rehab facilities and make any offense a life sentence behind bars. To be honest, that is what many would like.
I do not condone or minimize in any way the kind of behavior or abuse these people are accused of as there is no justification of such behavior. At the same time, how many of these men have been tried and convicted in anything other than social media and a for profit media that serves salacious content up to sell advertising?
If what they have done is illegal they should be sued in civil court and charged under criminal codes. Could any of these people get a fair and unbiased trial anywhere in these United States?
My problem with #metoo is that is looks like conviction by accusation with a news media all too quick to be Judge, a Jury and Executioner. Where is the presumption of innocence, the gathering of facts, the presentation of those facts before a jury of unbiased peers presided over by a judge?
In such an environment as #metoo, the potential for score settling by hurling an accusation of abuse is quite high. Think Salem Witch Trials where accused = guilty.
In my heart above all I am a civil libertarian and do not want to see anyone railroaded- victim or accused perpetrator. Our legal system has executed and incarcerated innocent people more than once. How many has the court of public opinion denied justice to?
14
They have millions of dollars. They can afford to just go away.
The only reason they would "come back" is to further feeding their egos.
3
Build critical thinking skills and engage in character and value development through resilience building is the answer to your question and so many others right now. Not just for perpetrators but for everyone.
What stops us from developing a new avocation (hobby), available and accessible to all, that builds our skills in thinking and being together?
Resilience building is not rocket science. It's social science. And social science is where we all can look for answers to difficult questions, like this one, and how we wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and how we create people who can tell the difference between a con man and a public servant at the polls.
What's needed now is to invite the thousands of college students who internalized resilience building practices to share their character building skill sets with the rest of us.
What stops us from calling on San Francisco State grads who internalized a simple, effective peer based resiliency building practice through their Community Involvement Center from starting community involvement circles? Why SFSU? Because they matter. This public urban campus is a quiet innovator in learning and human development. It also happens to be the most diverse campus in the US with the most first generation college students. They know what to do.
Look, you know it, I know it, we all know it. We need more than a march, we need momentum. This article complains. Every complaint contains a request.
1
"What Do We Do With these Men?" ...
Well first of all most of these men and the accusations against them, is within a very small circle in society, which seems that some people think this circle should revolve like a "black hole" in space and whisk them away into oblivion.....
4
If Charlie Rose wants to get Matt Lauer, Louis CK, et al up on stage, he should invite all of the women these men have abused, as well. Then there would be a real dialogue. Anything else is just a one-sided platform for aggrieved male celebrities to publicize themselves and their grievances. If they want to face the women who are accusing them, and listen to their side of the story, and then sincerely apologize in public, that might help redeem them. Anything else is just self-aggrandizement, a way to prop up their damaged male egos.
8
This is an excellent suggestion. If these men want to redeem themselves (and they should be granted this possibility), they must demonstrate true remorse by admitting exactly to what they did and publicly apologizing to each of their victims.
2
Asking the victims of abusers to help redeem their abusers and/or themselves by deepening their relationship with their abusers is both retrograde and demeaning to the victims. My advice to victims of these men: you owe them nothing but your scorn.
I am most encouraged to read the comments on this article. The level of thoughtfulness AND civility far exceeds that found in the once good newspaper to the south.
These men are all millionaires who don't even need to put in a day's work for the rest of their lives, but yet they hunger to be in front of the cameras again. What egos. You all got off easy -- pun intended by your abuse of a system that favors men over women in every way. You didn't go to prison, you didn't get fined. You just lost your cushy jobs. Now you're trying to stage a comeback is to satisfy your ego, the same way your sexual predatory behavior was to satisfy your sick mind. How about donating some of your millions -- made while harassing women -- to Girls Inc. or other organizations/programs that strengthen girls? This world ain't about you anymore.
10
For the celebrities, they are not poor.
Mario Batali: go to a kitchen and cook great food. Do not publicize it, do not meet with the diners. Keep your clothes on and hands on your knives and pots. And the end of a day, thank your co-workers for their hard work. Go home alone. Word about great food will be passed, and eventually you may be able to join the conversation again. Meanwhile, you're doing what you love.
Charlie Rose: You're a journalist; go journalize. There are interesting topics and stories to be analyzed. Find people who will talk to you. Keep your clothes on and your hand on your pencil. Go home alone, and write up your notes. Write a blog. Do not try to get on television or even in the newspaper. People who want to will read your blog. Eventually, you may be able to join the conversation again. Meanwhile, you're doing what you love.
Etc.
Except Harvey Weinstein. He probably needs to make sure his bank balance will last his life.
For non-celebrities, we need that conversation on what is the right punishment and when is it over. The problem is that the incidents are almost never over for the women involved; it is with them all their lives.
9
Mario Batali also needs to make sure he's washed his hands thoroughly before entering the kitchen.
Oh, brother. "Yet the interest in [Elva and Stranger's] story is a testament to people’s hunger for a new approach." Seriously? It strikes me more likely as garden-variety rubber necking at a crash scene. In other words, lurid spectacle.
2
What do we do with "these men"? The same thing we do with women who make false accusations. And, before you scream about how all women should be believed, two reminders:
(1) Hillary Clinton, who destroyed women harassed and raped by Bill Clinton, and
(2) The Innocence Project.
The reptilian Hillary Clinton needs no explanation. But, I remind you that in the early years of the Innocence Project, about every six months another man walked out of prison, exonerated of rape, DNA having conclusively proved that man, convicted on a woman's word, could not possibly have done it.
4
In other words, you want us to recognize that women are actually the problem, and must be understood as the deceitful reptiles they actually are.
Poor, poor Matt Lauer. Poor poor pitiful Charlie Rose. And the way those evil women set up poor, unhappy Donald Trump's ugly video tape, and forced him into all that cheatin' and lying.
There oughta be a law, amirite?
In the case of rapists being exonerated due to DNA and the Innocence Project, it's more complex than that, and your seeming implication that far too often, women lie about being raped. I'm not saying that some women don't make false accusations but...
Many rapists are not convicted simply on a woman's word (her word, which could either be 'I was raped, but I'm not sure who the man was', versus 'I was raped, and I know the person who did it'. Rape convictions are also meted out by way of circumstantial evidence, false witness testimony and overly-zealous prosecutors and D.A.'s. So in some instances it's not that the victim purposefully made a false accusation, but rather, that she couldn't be 100% sure if the accused and her rapist were one and the same. And then it was all the other players mentioned above, who ensured that that man would go to prison.
1
I will never get the career back that was denied me because men at work not only failed to promote me but sexually harassed me. Recently someone asked me, what I knew about a co-worker and I answered, "Not much other than he's circumsized."
5
None of us is perfect. "Restorative justice" works with that fact. Like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, this approach needs to enter our culture.
5
Where is the justice for the women in the future who are sexually abused because men like these realize they are going to only get a slap on the wrist? Preventive justice, knowing their actions have consequences, is necessary.
4
Nobody can help change a bad culture better than someone who has been there, then has been reborn through counseling, religion, reconciliation therapy or whatever other methods we can find that work. That's far more productive than "taking out the trash," one of the worst kept secrets in all businesses and professions but especially in education, from pre-K to PhD. It gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "don't ask, don't tell." But we also need to look at the definition of rape. Is it rape when a superior with power over the career of a physically smaller subordinate makes unwanted physical advances or engages in forceabile sex? Absolutely. But what about is a 25-yar-old teacher who stands 5-5 has consensual sex with a 6-2 football player who is 18 and never been one of her students? Is she guilty of rape? No. Bad judgment that should force her to seek another career, but simply by making her ineligible for a teacher's license--a fact not open to any public scrutiny unless she does? A much more sensible solution. And if the relationship was adulterous? That's between the spouses--if we make adultery a permanent bar to employment, sad to say, the unemployment rate would fall to super-sub zero because there'd be so few available job applicants. Very thoughtful article and a real public service.
4
How dare these men, wanting to have sexual relations with young beautiful women!
Hollywood and the liberal press are chomping on these miscreants, thus setting the stage of righteous indignation that President Trump is one of them and thus should be removed/impeached/exhiled and or not electable ( thought that the first time too didn't you ? ).
Well good luck with all this indignation, I lived through the seventies, this stuff is kids stuff next to that time period.
5
Offence happens. Some are widely gossiped about. Some are privately concealed. None are totally acceptable, to everyone. Some only exist to the offended, personally. Many like to talk about other's offences. Is that offensive?
Societies, tiny and vast, try to share some common ground. There is no perfect common ground. We each think we know something real and true. Only fools think it is therefore real and true for everyone. There are many fools. Some rarely and some nearly constantly. Writing stuff down sometimes helps. Not always.
We keep talking. Life goes on, then stops. Not fair to anyone, just everyone.
3
Hey, the nfl blackballs Kapernick. Seems like a fit punishment. Don’t hire, don’t engage and don’t watch. Shunning.
2
What you do with these men is ignore them, which you couldn't do before. That is the victory of #metoo. The point is, what are you going to do while they are out of the picture? Now you, us, all of us who loathe these men and their attitude towards women, have to create a new universe, without them in charge. Are we ready?
5
It's funny how nobody talks about their future prospects with women/love interests. As long as they have money they won't have a problem in that area as we see with the worst of oafs. Their next girlfriend or wife will be vilified - by women - of course.
Please tell me this isn't going to happen.
5
No publicity, no employment, no mentioning, no influence, no attention, no naming, no photos, no stories, no nostalgia, no notice. Turn around, see the women they have stomped on, let the women rise.
What Do We Do With These Men?, via @nytimes
10
This is a complicated question - there apparently is such a range of behaviors involved. From stupid ill timed or misread signals for a kiss or hug to sexual violence. My God - how can anyone suggest a one size fits all?
Al Franken seems to have been hung out to dry for little more than stupid male behavior (women certainly have their own version) while the thought of Charlie Rose walking out of his bathroom with robe wide open and genitals .... well - you get it - is shocking & very disturbing.
I don't have an answer - no one does. I have no doubt some of these accusations are being used as weapons - and sadly sexuality has been used as a weapon for as long as there have been humans.
It is sad the tremendous life changing pain has been inflicted on so many women...very sad. - Many of us have also been physically or emotionally been beaten up by life at one time or another.
5
Al Franken was one of my favorite senators and I was heartbroken when the news about him came out. But we don't know all of his offenses. If they were minor, why didn't he stand before the ethics committee to fight the charges? It makes one wonder whether other actions of his were more severe and could be damaging.
Who would have thought the sight of a naked man could be so traumatic. Surprise the women did not turn into pillars of salt like Lot's wife.
1
Correct, there are degrees of bad behavior. Al Franken should have waited this one out, in place, not been so vilified by colleagues who have lost my respect.
1
I believe that money talks. If these men say that they want to make restitution and help change these women's lives for the better, then I say they should donate half of their money to the MeToo cause. I'm sure the combined wealth of these men would care for hundreds and hundreds of women that are trying to seek justice for themselves. Somebody like Charlie Rose or Hollywood's X premier producer could each come up with 25 million easily. This would be a wonderful start in believing that these men want to reallly help to see justice for all those women out there.
Please help these women 'men' with the justice they deserve. Do that and I'm sure the American people would act in a Christian manner and start your healing process. What price, a clear heart gentlemen, what price would you pay to be able to lift your head in public.
3
I never want to see Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer again. They've enough dough to live without ever having to work. You know what these men made in a year? Tens of millions, year after year. Downsize-Sell the 2nd house in Westchester or Long Island and you can live like a king for the rest of your life. They should go to a psychiatric clinic to talk about the urges to expose themselves and to harass women. This is a mental disease, there can be no other explanation for this abusive behavior. Make your comebacks in ten years after you've gone through therapy and community service.
6
For each and every one of them: how many women had their careers stunted, stilted, or short changed? Where's the effort to give those women another chance?
If, on the other hand, there's no evidence that the cad's bad behavior created obstacles for the women around them, I'd give them a chance to redeem themselves and to demonstrate they know how to keep their pants on and the hands to themselves and their tongue respectful.
6
Let them give it a shot and see what happens. They're done. The public will turn its back on them. NO second chances.
4
Inaaprioate and irresponsible to include Mr. Ashbrook in a piece about the #metoo moment and the men involved. Ashbrook was fired for creating a hostile environment ie being a jerk, not sexual assault or predatory behavior
3
Too bad the women didn't slap them across the face and then report the transgressions...
....because all this whining decades later is kind of stupid...
8
Yes, this is how women should react now that they have enough social standing to prevent them from being fired for inappropriate behavior. It is the "whining" decades later that has brought the issue up in a way that society finally takes it seriously. Possibly enough is enough though. It isn't really helpful unless the man is being considered for or holds a position of authority.
1
What should we do? Continue the conversation, which this article does. It has taken so many years just to get to this point where we are finally discussing and acknowledging that there are issues (large and small) caused by the patriarchy. I hope this is just the beginning of the conversation not the final chapters. Reducing the problem to its parts - whether we should lump people who committed a real crime (crosby) with those who made an error in judgment - is just another attempt to dismiss the conversation by belittling the details. Classic deflection tactic of the patriarchy. Let’s focus on the real issues at hand, starting with getting them to admit to their own behavior.
5
Rolling Stone case. Anyone?
7
Let's just create a pig list. An online searchable list of any hetero male offenders (other gender or genderless offenders can go on someone else's list). All of them - From the guy you work with who can only converse with your breasts, to the college boy who figured since you were drunk it was okay, to the boss who whipped it out because he just knew you wanted it. From the relatively benign to the outright criminal.
Because for most of them - There's no need to "return" to normal life, because their normal life hasn't been interrupted - Because we say or do nothing, due to all sorts of reasons.
Perhaps if the name was out there with one woman's experience, others could search it and add their voice, and maybe there could be strength in numbers.
4
I find this proposal objectionable. So any woman can post the name of any man who has made an "objectionable" comment or looked at her " the wrong way". Where has our sense of due process gone? Where is the remedy for someone whose name is added to the "pig list" for no reason at all?
1
Men who assault and harass women see women as objects. I don't believe, given the opportunity, that most abusers will listen to or empathize with their victims. What they respect is male hierarchy, therefore, it must be other men who set the standard, shun such behavior and demand that it change.
14
Exactly this.
Yes, predators will prey again if they are not rehabilitated. So what's the second act? The author recognizes that permanent banishment form life is not the solution and generously proposes solution beyond the punitive. After all, the goal is not to punish a few high profile personalities, but to change fundamentally the relationship between men and women. That's a tall order and we should seize this historic opportunity.
6
One stops being "a victim" by fighting against the specific predatory behavior, and the general culture that supports it - by calling it out and making the moral case against it. Women who object to harassment and black Americans who draw attention to structural impediments to their advancement are no longer "victims" - they are "advocates." It is not surprising that those whose life patterns/privileges are upended by these voices/changes in culture fight back. It's up to those of us newly coming to awareness about the extent of the lack of justice in our society to insist upon it. It won't happen overnight.
10
Actually, Ned, the opposite is true. Often when women stand up to rape/harassment/discrimination, the victimhood begins.
Case in point: I filed a complaint against a professor who sexually assaulted me in class (other students were afraid/pretended not to notice). I was forced out of school and my transcript was retroactively changed to include a bogus "academic misconduct" designation. I cannot get a degree and am effectively exiled from my field. What do they expect me to do? Commit suicide?
Another case: I have been fired again and again for speaking up for speaking up about sexual harassment/assault on the job. Only one boss went to jail (attempted rape/raped a coworker) and pretty sure it was only because he was black/had a record. I still lost my job.
Another time, I was able to actually get a lawyer for another job where I was fired for speaking up against discrimination (supervised lesser qualified men who earned more than I) After years, my settlement was-no joke-$1000. One. Thousand.
I also confronted a couple of the men who brutally raped me as a small child. Told them that I forgave them. The result: I have zero family. They have all shunned and rejected me for speaking/standing up. People don't realize what a huge deal family privilege is unless/until they have none.
Every time I have made a moral case and stood up, the backlash has been comparable to, if not worse than, the initial assault/rape/discrimination.
Wish your fantasy were true!
3
Thank you for sharing your story. It is shocking. It also underscores a deeper layer of human behavior than the celebrities in the article. I, too, have noticed that in family rape cases, the victim is shunned by both men and women. I fear that people are just selfish. The metoo movement can contribute to preventing sexual assault in the first place by moderating predatory behavior. We have to seize this moment
If they need a model, Joy Reid AMJoy provided a beautiful one yesterday morning. She was honest, engaging, listened more than she talked. Let's have more of that!!
Greg.
4
Greg, also remind all us ladies to smile while we are being quiet and letting you talk.
Should we lump all these offenders together? Yes, indeed. True, some like green socks and others blue. Some cry at weddings and others remain stoic. Yet their soul crushing behavior with women have tossed them into the same fetid pile of human waste.
8
See Pat Yeaman comment below.
This article is exemplary in that it acknowledges that society must somehow determine a fate for sexual predators; like miscreants of all kinds, they won't simply *go away*.
Restorative Justice, a process that evolved over millennia, would, as the author suggests, be appropriate, for it offers several benefits. For victims of sexual abuse, it offers the opportunity to confront their perpetrator with the personal, emotional consequences of that abuse in a non-confrontational setting, which can contribute to their emotional healing. Perpretrators are more likely to hear and understand how and why their behavior is harmful. This, in turn, presents the possibility for change and growth, not only in themselves, but for boys and men they have influence on. Happy outcomes are not assured, of course, but our society must do more than just accuse and punish if we are to make headway in solving this vexing issue.
2
I think most perpetrators don't care how or why their behavior is harmful. Restorative Justice to them would just be an exercise in making someone believe they are sorry, when they may well not be.
5
Al Franken wasn’t given due process, when he asked for an ethics committee investigation. I believe everyone deserves it, to protect against false accusations.
33
There is a difference between "bad men" and ordinary humans who have done bad things. We should not, as this article does, use the terms interchangeably. This is because the bad things will fall on a continuum of badness and how the perpetrators are dealt with must take the severity of their actions into account. Crimes must be prosecuted, victims taken seriously, justice done. But for less than criminal offenses we must find a better way than how we deal with the issue at the moment. This discussion is difficult but important.
34
Thought provoking. I worked for the fed govt; same issue existed within the Agency. Sometimes the acts weren't deemed serious enough for firing so they just moved them to another position within the Agency. the reason why they were moved was confidential so new supervisors and co-workers weren't aware; the person did it again and the cycle continued, too much for overworked legal staffs to tie the acts together.
Then they started looking for things they could fire for, once and done, like timecard falsification. That got them out of the Agency but passed the trash, as their personnel files were confidential not even accessible to other federal agencies. Ultimately something will have to be figured out.
5
What we should do is not allow them to be part of 'normal' society until they have shown they can follow the rules of 'normal' society - those rules where you don't abuse and harass, where you do respect and value. Well, a girl can dream.
Should and will are very different things however. It seems difficult to imagine that all of these guys have accepted the fault lay with them and that they need to change; people are good at rationalising their own bad behaviour. Some will have realised they acted very inappropriately; some will be blaming everyone but themselves. So eventually and depending on their own power - they'll return and it will be an unpleasant period, something talked about in hushed tones. Some will likely do the thing all over again, some will not.
But I bet the expectation will still be on women to do something, not men.
A girl can dream, but she's used to reality too.
5
Thank you for this article. It raises important issues. The author asks, "What do we do with these 'bad men?'" "Under what terms should they be allowed to return to normal life and is there a way to do so that doesn't put more of a burden on the people harmed...?"
There must be both atonement and forgiveness. Atonement must come first and it must be in a form that satisfies the hurt one. The atonement must be personal and it must be completely without guile. If the hurt one needs time to forgive - so be it.
But there must also be forgiveness. Without it, both the perpetrator AND the hurt one are bound to each other in a way that burdens both. Freedom must be the goal of atonement and forgiveness. It cannot NOT include all parties.
"Oh, but this will take time and effort!," you might say. Well, the crimes took time and effort too. And besides, what else are we here for but to heal ourselves? In this way, each of us can thank the 'bad men' and the ones they hurt - for they have shown us the healing we all need.
None of us are not guilty of hurting someone else in some form and none of us have not been hurt and needed atonement for it. Let us all show each other what this looks like and begin a process of even bigger healing. What else more important is there for us to do?
8
Atonement must be in a form that satisfies society. The hurt one does not get to decide punishment unilaterally, and if society's punishment is not acceptable, they can work to change it.
2
Agreed. Atonement must be both local and non-local. It must satisfy the "I" and the "We." Consciousness occurs at both the personal and group level AT THE SAME TIME. When one human being is hurt, all humans suffer, and when one human being is healed, many others heal also. Both suffering and healing occur at morphic levels, within a morphic field.
1
I propose each of the accused men to write, sign and publish or publicize (and deliver to his victims if possible) his own version of a declaration that includes:
1. A guilty plea of misbehavior
2. An explicit apology
3. An offer to reconcile with each victim in the presence of a mediator if she/he chooses to
4. A vow to never make the same specified mistakes or engage in the same specified misbehaviors
5. A promise to adhere to a specified code of conduct that details respectful, honorable, ethical and moral behaviors to everyone, particularly women, both in public and in private
6. A course of corrective or punitive actions in case of a lapse of unacceptable conduct
7. A public gesture, possibly selected from a list of his victims' suggestions, to demonstrate that he is serious and genuine about his remorse
24
Your assumption is that the accused are all guilty of wrongdoing.
1
Why not ostracize these perpetrators? We socially condemn people for far less. Being too fat, too old, too nerdy. These men are people who used their social capital to harm others. Polite society should punish them for it. Anything else is a double standard that says women's views on appropriate behavior don't matter as much as men's.
30
I agree that there should accountability and punishment, but be careful of how far because one day it might be your own male loved one accused and you will see things differently. These particular men are wealthy enough not to need to work, but what of others.
6
because being fat or too old are in plain sight. Your's is a poor example. Ostracizing someone for being accused? Sounds like wearing a "Scarlet Letter" is back in vogue with #metoo and other supporters.
Unaccountable "justice" to deal with unaccounted-for deeds.
Doesn't sound like a plan.
1
I am pretty perturbed by the allegations against Tom Brokaw. It feels like another right-wing setup to me, like what was done to Al Franken. The me too movement is understandable, but it is way out of line now IMO. Accusation is not necessarily fact; there is a tremendous amount of grey area as to what constitutes unwanted sexual advances--
On second thought, perhaps all of this is good. Making it very difficult to navigate male-female relationships could reduce the population. I am in favor of that.
38
I completely agree. Seduction is now becoming not just politically incorrect, but criminal. Someone who regrets sleeping with a person they met at a bar is different than someone dealing with violent and coercive behavior. Also, women aren't perfect. Some can be vengeful, acting out of resentment for not having feelings reciprocated. This idea that accusers can't be questioned but must always in all cases be believed is ridiculous, and it will unfortunately disempower the #metoo movement.
1
Maybe we should create some sort of blacklist.. Oh, wait: that’s what this article is about!
13
tired trope
“Developed by indigenous communities” is a silly way of giving credit. Which communities? When? Under what structures of power?
When you talk about “indigenous communities” in such an ahistorical way, you’re not showing respect: you’re exoticizing real people and turning then into faceless “noble savages.”
5
Adam, I can't really agree with you. Many indigenous communities have models for justice that differ from that in the current U.S. society; some have had restorative justice-type systems for quite some time. The issue is, to the extent that these communities are viewed as sources of better ideas for justice because they offer additional, different, and often more effective ways of bringing offenders back into the society without harm to the society, we are all much better off.
Let's appreciate these sources of innovation that we apparently sorely need. I am all for looking at indigenous communities for ideas--there will be plenty of alternatives.
And before you start screaming, this is not cultural appropriation, it is cultural appreciation for the alternative models of justice that they offer.
7
Do these communities require that the accusations be proven, or do they just take the aggrieved's word a crime has occurred?
Comments here about witch hunts and lynching are offensive. I haven't noticed any men being tested in dunking chairs or burned at the stake. As for lynching, that was the special tool of racists who terrorized African American communities for decades. I suggest that defensive men drop those obnoxious references and acknowledge that victims have a right to speak out and seek justice.
The article mentions restorative justice, but the process is fraught with peril. Universities have used a version of it for students in date rape cases. It didn't work. If mandatory, restorative justice is just another way that victims can be abused.
The "pass the trash" approach for nonviolent offenses is disturbing but employers and educational institutions worry about libel suits if they bad mouth people in references.
My first concerns are: 1) educating people, especially children, so they come forward about abuse; 2) improving the criminal justice system, so that victims aren't further abused; 3) encouraging women - and men - to be open about abuse and harassment.
Many men have yet to learn how to behave respectfully with women and learn that no means no. I do have some hope that young men and boys are learning from more open discussion of these issues.
19
I agree with your thoughtful comments. I want to add that women need to look at our own roles in sexual misconduct. We thrill to the attention and the feeling of being 'attractive and desirable' until a man takes things a bit farther than we feel comfortable with. "... takes two to Tango." We dance until the last minute and then blame him -
#MeToo is just on the verge of a tipping point that makes us look air-headed. Attention-seeking women just make it harder for women who are truly abused.
2
Quite frankly I’ve been more harmed by the emotional and psychological abuse of other women, than the attempts of men to be sexual. In my personal experience (casting no doubts upon the experiences of other women) none of the men were predators, they were clumsy and more scared than I was. The women, however, were intentionally cruel and destructive. Too bad that’s not a crime.
51
"Passing the trash" is essentially the question here.
When perpetrators are just pushed off campus or out of a parish or off camera as a solution, the potential for future abuse has not diminished one iota.
The big names in media, we are all familiar with, have much less to do with the many, many schools, colleges, workplaces, churches where the abuser is not named, is not stopped, and the list of their victims continue to grow.
Power-based violence is a problem in every community. Often it is a crime and needs to be treated as such. Victims need to be believed, people in positions of power over others need to behave appropriately or be called to account and face consequences.
8
If Katie Baker thinks restorative justice is worth exploring, why does she trash the education consultant who works with expelled students? Expelled college students are many times found responsible under questionable circumstances. Title IX abjudications can be deeply flawed -- starting with prejudicial training materials that cite discredited research about repeat offenders and Title IX coordinators who are not always impartial or neutral. All this happens behind closed doors.
There are over 125 lawsuits (most federal) where accused student plaintiffs have either prevailed outright or the schools have settled before the lawsuits advanced. Are you going to tell me federal judges are giving these accused students a pass? Or could it be that they did not deserve to be suspended or expelled? Even Ruth Bader Ginsburg observed earlier this year that campus policies and proceedings are problematic! A sitting Supreme Court Justice with ACLU bona fides! You really shouldn't lump expelled college students in with the monsters, grown men like Billy Cosby and Harvey Weinstein who engaged in reprehensible behavior for decades.
Expelled college students are not looking to make a comeback -- they never got to that point in life. Rather they are looking for a second chance to have the future that was denied them. Many deserve this. Let's figure this out.
30
Putting aside the cases in the margins like Frankin... Why hasn’t Weinstein been arrested and charged yet? This is our justice system failing. Seems to me this failure has more to do with Weinstein’s political connections than his gender.
14
A prosecutor has no business charging anyone until there is enough admissible evidence to sustain a conviction. Cases don’t get better after they’ve been filed.
We need to change our sexist legal system before we can mete out appropriate punishments. Get rid of the statute of limitations for rape, child abuse, and other forms of sexual predation. Pass the Equal Rights Amendment. Make the processing of rape kits and DNA matching mandatory. Do those first and then let’s talk.
27
why not change the system fo murder? It's the ultimate of horrendous crimes. Being selfish and self serving serves no one in the end.
We should bring much more clarity and precision to these conversations.
Are we talking about the workplace, or about dating, marriage, affairs, and hookups generally?
What problems are there that wouldn’t be solved by testing the rape kits and proceeding accordingly; no means no; speak up if you want something to stop; always take “no” for an answer (and if she really means yes she’s going to have to take the risk of saying that); don’t mistreat your date or partner; no catcalling or other rude ways of making people afraid or embarrassed; and, in the workplace, no quid pro quo, hostile work environment, or retaliation for rejection?
Not long ago the terms “rape” and “sexual assault” were clear narrow terms that referred to conduct overwhelming perpetrated by men and regarding which society must clearly intervene. Is it not the case that, as those terms are broadened, the relative percentage of perpetrators who are women will rise and the case for outside intervention becomes less clear? Unfortunately I can tell several stories about bad behavior by women, a couple of which caused lasting harm; but it’s hard to say why I need society to intervene.
Anything like the Title IX “Dear Colleague” letter must first be supported by thorough hearings with wide public participation.
10
I'd like men to be very afraid of stepping out of line for a couple of decades at least. I want lots and lots of fear. Because that's how most women have lived and still live. In fear. I want that fear to sink so deeply into the male psyche that slowly but surely a change of attitude emerges. Until there is NOTHING about maleness that requires/enjoys female fear.
29
Most women don't live in fear. I know I'm not a woman but I also know you can't speak for all women especially all women who have lived and still live. The women I worked along side of in the health care field for many years were strong self-reliant intelligent individuals. They would find your depiction of women pathetic.
3
Funny how often the bullied become the bully.
How about we all become good people instead.
3
If you haven’t checked with these women, you might want to talk to them explicitly about these kinds of experiences. It’s conceivable that they live in a world devoid of these concerns, but I know I’ve recently told long-time male colleagues just a fraction of the experiences of harassment and sexism I’ve had to deal with over the course of my career, and I have to say they were surprised and shaken. I can easily imagine them making declarations that their workplace is devoid of such problems before I shared some of my experiences.
Be wary about speaking for women, particularly if you haven’t really earnestly inquired about their experiences.
1
There are two discrete problems we are looking at. The first is obvious - men who break the law by assaulting or harassing women and how we punish those whom we have a hard time being able to prove guilty in a criminal trial.
The second is what do we do about the fact that the underlying cause is a sort of prejudice and entitlement that we have not been able to fully banish in the two hundred years since women were regarded more as property than people.
With Bill Cosby, we made strides in holding a very powerful man culpable for sexual assault and rape. His legacy is trash. But for others - Lauer, Weinstein, Rose - who suffer from droit de seigneur, how do we keep them and others from continuing to use power to lord over others?
That is a basic human failing we haven't solved regarding sexism, ageism and most certainly racism, and the #MeToo movement will only make a dent in the internal workings of some people.
29
If Charlie Rose or any of these men get a show on TV, there should be a movement to demand that advertisers and everyone else boycott the channel. One would hope that a wealthy, famous harrasser such as this would stay off TV but this type of person has tremendous ego needs.
2
What do we do? We elect women, we promote women, we follow women. Period. #Enough!
27
Oh phooey. We elect decent human beings, of integrity; we follow inspirational leaders who respect all regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, religion.
Enough of this ridiculous polarization; we can work on these issues of abuse and disrespect without resorting to qualifying people for office based on their genitals.
33
Just what we need, more Palins, Ernst's, Bachmann's, Cheney's, DeVos's...
C'mon, how about good people.
If they are women, then an added bonus. But to vote gender, just because, gives us more of the same. Are you forgetting the 52% of White Women that voted for Trump? Do you really think that just because they are women they are above reproach. If so then we are in a world of hurt and trouble.
4
mub- oh phooey. since when has either Trump or Pence been decent or had interity?
This commenter has a handle on what must start happening right now "...along with the collectives of enablers and buck-passers who were party to those dynamics." Basic to how we begin to change the culture.
3
I work with victims of domestic violence. Here in Texas, we have programs called "BIPPs" - Batterers' Intervention and Prevention Programs. They are long (usually six months), and demanding. But I've seen them change lives.
20
Frankly, the fact that people are not only willing, but *eager* to overlook the ideal of "Innocent until proven Guilty in a court of law" terrifies me. The court of public opinion is fickle and totally at the whims of whatever mob mentality rules it at the moment. Pieces like this only lend credence to the people who say #MeToo is just a glamorized witch hunt, the modern equivalent of the mob who decided Tom Robinson's fate before he ever set foot in a courtroom.
23
Innocent until proven guilty is a legal standard; it doesn't apply in this case as the author is discussing whether or not men like Rose and Lauer should be given new platforms in the media. Viewers and companies can decide that these men don't deserve to make a professional comeback. That's not indicative of a "mob mentality" or a "witch hunt." It's a reasonable decision about which voices we want to amplify in public discourse.
Comparing powerful, wealthy men who've lost their jobs to Tom Robinson - a fictional sharecropper who was lynched - is completely hyperbolic. Losing a job is not a death sentence. Maybe spare some sympathy for the women that they harmed for decades.
14
Mob rule has its downsides. I wonder how the author would feel if they were on the receiving end?
Amazing how soon you will discard principles when it suits us as individuals.
28
Let them live a quiet life in “retirement” at home, OR, in prison, if convicted with a crime.
DO NOT GIVE THEM MORE AIRTIME!!! OR, MORE ADVERTISING DOLLARS!!
They all had their chance. There are far more worthy faces, voices, and minds to turn our attention to.
24
This article and the many of the responses to it are chilling. Once again, in one of America’s most obscene traditions, America is burning witches. Social Justice warriors have whipped up a hysteria.
Men’s lives are being destroyed unjustly. A woman makes an accusation, the mob finds them guilty without due process and then hands out a lifetime sentence enforced by the same nasty, provincial multitude. Pusillanimous corporations fire the men and the men themselves meekly walk to the stake. It won’t end until someone fights back. The few real cases of harassment by the Weinstein’s of the world cannot excuse the lives being destroyed, men like Al Franken, Louis CK, and Charlie Rose are being ruined by minor infractions or outright lies.
America has gone so far off the rails now that we will never get back on track. Fascism is coming, and it may come from the Right or the Left, but it will come because it is now clear that the people no longer believe in their system of government or the rule of law. A people enthralled by the worst devils of their nature will allow their democracy to slip away without even noticing.
34
Interesting that you are using the phrase "witch hunt" in response this situation. Historically in the United States and Europe the vast majority of people executed for "witch craft" were women in farming based communities (aka lower class women) who either fought against being passive domestic partners or sought out education for themselves in a religious right society.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch-hunt
Most of the stories outlined in Katie J. M. Baker's article are about powerful and wealthy men who were called into account for their abuse of power. That's definitely the opposite gender and power dynamics as those historical witch hunts. Please look for a different metaphor.
32
Some here are saying "witch hunt," others "mob" or "lynch mob." Focusing on the now obscure use of witch hunt, it's original reference to hunting for perceived to be real witches, obfuscates the discussion. Other terms have no such gender specificity or refer to unjust mob actions typically focused on men. All of the uses refer to a lack of judicious deliberation or fairness. That is obviously what people are referring to. Why would you feel that you need to change the subject?
11
It would be interesting to see what you would do if your supervisor did the same to you, as Rose did to the women that worked for him.
I would like to point out to the many here who are just short of recommending the death penalty to every man who does any degree of sexual misconduct that there are many many women are also guilty of some of the lesser offenses. There will come a day when they will be confronted with that fact as well, and how will you react to what to do with them? Will you hold up equality as an ideal then, and treat them this way? These are still human beings, whatever serious missteps they have made.
27
The grabby V.P of Sales should not only be fired, he should be subject to extrajudical "restorative justice" community tribunals. This isn't about social change for (some) women. It's about revenge and collective punishment. And it's absolutely chilling.
Human depravity is equally distributed amongst the sexes. Women - collectively - are not more moral than men. They're are less physically violent - they are too small to attack men and less physically capable of inflicting harm - but every bit as aggressive and immoral. Take a quick look at the child abuse statistics.
I have a son and a daughter. I do not want either subject to restorative justice. The mob is immoral. We've seen collective punishment before. It doesn't end well.
26
Stephen, restorative justice approaches have been useful in a variety of situations--Baltimore experimented with this and first-time youth offenders as a diversion program; it worked quite well as far as I know.
It really isn't mob rule if done well. Revenge and collective punishment...should be examined for what these lead to, probably never good. So while I appreciate your fears, we are going to need to find some way of resolving the harm caused by sexual abuse, and some way of deterring perps.
5
It's not even been a year. It just seems all so unseemly to be talking about comebacks when there hasn't even/yet been any talk or actions of atonement or restorative justice. Ick guys. Can you wait at least one year? How long did these women have to wait to be heard?
23
My daughter was harassed by a professor and she brought a case under Title IX. He was removed from the university and rumor was that he was teaching at a community college. My daughter felt the case was hers and the remedy was hers. She didn't care where he showed up as long as it wasn't anywhere near her. The whole process she went through was unpleasant and pursuing a remedy for the benefit of other women was not on her agenda. After all, most other women don't pursue their own cases and some of her friendds resented hers. The notion that a private harassment case is brought for the benefit of women at large is pretty presumptuous considering how little support they give, on the whole, to those who do the hard work.
11
I'm discouraged by how many of the comments on this article are some version of, "Yeah, but not everybody is as bad as Bill Cosby." Yes, of course. That's obvious. The arguments about proportionality are obscuring a real discussion of how we should reckon with the massive harm that's been caused by abusive men. I wish some of the people who are so concerned about the harm that's been done to, say, Charlie Rose's career would be more concerned about all of the women who were victimized by him.
Also interesting to note how many of the comments calling for proportionality were written by men. Perhaps they need to spend some time looking inward...
45
To be expected, unfortunately. A little more than 24 hours after only ONE male gets convicted (but through endless appeals likely will never see one day of prison), the MRAs and sexists tribes are losing their minds. And this is after Cosby raped more than 50+ women over 40 years - with the rape of Ms. Constand 14 years ago. Why on earth ought any person of character and morals give one whit for a bunch of degenerate men who used their power, money, connections or just gender to traumatize and sexually assault female after female after female? But that is the power of the patriarchy. It take hundreds of female victims to match the value of a handful of males.
12
Charley Rose should never have the oppotunity to return.
Thank you for this. We don't want to be like the Catholic Church who just kept shuffling them around without warning the next community only to watch them reoffend. There needs to be a tracking process and the severity of the punishment needs to fit the crime. Those who can be rehabilitated should be given the opportunity to do so. This movement will receive a nasty backlash if there's no chance of redemption.
That said, there needs to be consequences for repeat offenders like Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, and Mario whose abusive behavior spanned decades. They're done or nothing will change.
18
Well, there's your problem right there. Solutions depend on perps admitting they were wrong. They dont, and neither do families m. Hard to proceed without internal change. Listening to their sisters and moms talk about behavior they've experienced might be a good start.
14
This is a familiar question, though set in a different context from what I'm used to. For me, this story is an echo of a much wider one about what we do with rejects, criminals, and other human disposables. And the wider issue it relates to is about the mindset that shifts problems out of sight and out of mind. Whether it's retail waste or human waste, once it's in the bin, very few people are willing to follow it on a journey to the landfill, or to ask questions about what happens there.
This is the question of dereliction: the abandonment of human lives, and the abandonment of responsibility by those who should know better. In turn, that willful neglect is symptomatic - not just of the way business slices and dices its way around tricky issues, but of the way we as a society still think there's an Australia or a penal colony or sanatorium to serve as 'away' and out of our lives. Society hasn't caught up, neither has the justice system, nor have institutional and economic worlds. Sleazebags with money can buy their way back in. Some of them persist.
What's wanted is something like restorative justice, scaled up, as Ms Baker notes, so that Mr Rose is put to work making improvements to the lives of people who've been at the wrong end of people like him. Weinstein, Cosby, Larry Nassar, Jerry Sandusky and others should be digging deep to put things right, along with the collectives of enablers and buck-passers who were party to those dynamics.
15
I have to side with forgiveness here, this is an excellent article. There should be reprecussions, but not so severely that men feel driven to suicide or permanent ostracization.
The ancient Greeks would have the accuser name a punishment at the end of the trial, and allow the defendant to name a counter offer. Then a jury of peers decides which of the two to impose. (Socrates made a famously bad choice.)
That might not be perfect, but I think it would allow the accused to hold himself to account, and move past the ordeal with more meaningful action.
14
"Bad men are not just on our TV screens, but in our classrooms, our workplaces, our friend circles, even our families." The worst of these bad men who abuse their power, money, fame with women, sits tweeting away in the Oval Office. #timesup
17
"#MeToo is supposed to reckon with the misdeeds of all men, not just the rich and powerful. "
This attitude is what creates backlashes. As well as conflating all #MeToo violence (violent rape vs. harrassment).
Not all men are guilty of misdeeds--unless we water down misdeeds to the point of idiocy. And to say "to tell men to sit down, to stay quiet, to disappear" is idiotic; as if there is any real discussion of that.
19
The "backlash" by males against females has been going on for 2000 years. It matter not at all how females react. Sadly, it matters not at all to men if females distrust them, fear them and even avoid them just to maintain some sense of safety and sanity in their lives. How on earth can boys and men not be mortified that half the population thinks they are unstable, untrustworthy and dangerous?
11
It should be clear from the context that it means "misdeeds by men of all classes." It doesn't mean that all men are guilty of sexual harassment, but that countless men who have are out of the public eye and thus less likely to be exposed.
And conflating violent rape and harassment? Did you miss the part where she says "#MeToo is also supposed to reflect a spectrum of coercive behavior, not just crimes that should lead to prison sentences. Bill Cosby is one thing; but many women don’t want the V.P. of sales who got too handsy at the Christmas party to be banished forever, let alone go to prison"?
You're not arguing with this column, you're arguing with what you imagine this column to be.
6
Guilt by accusation- the American way. The media and public constantly fall for this. Talk about what to do with these men; how about a fair trial by jury? Never heard of it? Just ask Bill Cosby. That's the American and right way of doing htings, not the way #metoo wants to do things.
10
What to do with these men? Well, it depends on which men you're talking about. Weinstein is a scuzz, but are you including Matt Damon or Aziz Ansari who were swept up in the broad net of #metoo outrage? What about Al Franken? What I'd do with Al Franken is vote for him for president. And I'm a woman who has had my own #metoo encounters in life, but I'm against throwing all accused men into the same bucket.
274
The trouble is males put themselves into the same bucket by choosing to be predators and garden variety misogynists. Surely, no sane person contends men and boys don't know their hands do not belong up the skirt and on the body of a female, that to drug and rape a woman is a crime, that crudely harassing a girl or woman is repellent; that job discrimination indicates weak males need bro assistance to function on a daily basis as well as a female employee would without the bro buddies.
8
“The trouble is...”. Say what!!??
The trouble is gross generalities, authored by sexists.
No. All men are not in the same bucket and I take exception to that generality. In your own life, did you have to request a kiss from every man? Did you have to ask for every bit of affection from a male you wished to have affection from? Then what are the "rules"? Define the "bucket" you refer to. Both genders have hormones and I have been on both sides (giving and receiving) of an unwelcome kiss or gesture. I didn't attribute my motives nor the others as an opportunity to take advantage of another. I do not paint all women, or men, with the same brush. Sorry. Perhaps a bit more reflection before writing might have helped.
Other than make the point that already/at some point some people will stage comebacks and that institutions pass the trash ( - Catholic Church anyone? -) I'm not sure what Ms. Baker's big take away is here. A bit of musing mixed with fearmongering? - the piece just sort of lumps an awkwardly handsy VP at a Christmas party with a rapist who gave a TED talker with Louis C.K.
Lastly, while Ms. Baker give's us no certain policy choice, lines like this one - "More and more students and faculty. . .were being removed from school grounds, but no one was proposing solutions, at least not publicly, for where they should go." - Give me pause. Where are people (privately, apparently) suggesting someone fired for a complaint but not pursued civilly or criminally go? "Institutions?" "Camps?" I mean honestly...
8
Has anyone considered looking at these men as individuals? Has anyone shown real remorse? Has someone received accusations that were inflated? (Al Franken.) Have any of these men sought counseling? Was some of it innocent obliviousness?
Can anyone consider forgiveness?
Not everyone who fell as a result of #MeToo is Bill Cosby.
114
Yoga and meditation work wonders, you know.
4
Have men considered looking at women as individuals?? If a particular man apologizes for minor, clueless harassment, then he will probably be forgiven. But, in general, women have been forgiving men for bad behavior for far too long and we are SICK and TIRED of putting up with being treated as sex objects, having to live in fear of rape (and murder just for being female) and being dismissed as lesser human beings. Women do not exist to be playthings or slaves. This whole movement is an effort to change attitudes so our daughters and granddaughters can live in a better world.
3
Before talking about rehabilitation, let’s hear them say “I am truly sorry.”
28
Comebacks will not occur in the majority of these cases.
The #MeToo movement happened in large measure because the internet created a critical mass of accusations against individuals in a relatively short time period. Then they fell.
Likewise, the information on the internet about serial sexual harassment will not go away.
These controversies and cases have taken on a different dynamic and momentum in recent times. Guys like Harvey Weinstein never reckoned that.
The technology changed. It's not a telltale change like DNA in criminal cases. It's was more oblique and not as easy to apprehend. Nonetheless, the sharing and accumulation of digital information caught these guys with their pants down. And the image won't go away.
6
Weinstein and Lauer's actions are vastly, VASTLY different in severity and even in nature from Louis C.K.'s, and the behavior of Ashbrook was found to have had nothing to do with sexual harassment or predation.
This kind of careless, false equivalency demonstrates why so many second-wave, female feminists who have experienced many me-too events (myself included) have begun to distance themselves from the MeToo movement. What began as a clear and just call to awareness has now has been muddied by irresponsible and dangerous people who write as though slash and burn is acceptable. The hijacking of "MeToo" isn't dissimilar to that of the word "feminist" so many years ago.
I, for one (of many), applaud the much-maligned article by Katie Roiphe that speaks to this. "The bad men"--really? https://harpers.org/archive/2018/03/the-other-whisper-network-2/
23
As both a victim of sexual abuse and an aunt of a rapist I agree wholeheartedly with this article. I am also a psychotherapist and have treated victims and perpetrators. Therapy is not the end all and be all but some form of self reflection is essential for prolonged change. There needs to be a path for redemption that includes paying back a debt to the victims and society. This doesn't mean jail time always but it's not something that can be accomplished in a few weeks either. My nephew was in jail for several years, engaged in counseling in prison, no longer drinks,and has had to become self employed as his criminal record makes him unemployable. He is very fortunate to have a loving partner and community that support his continued growth. If he had not been convicted I doubt his changes for the better would have happened. However, if he had not chosen to embark on a path of self improvement he would not have developed such a good support system. It's not the victim's responsibility to forgive, demand the perp changes, or provide a means for the offenders to do so. We as a community are responsible to do these actions. We have the knowledge to do it, we don't have the will yet. I hope this metoo awakening acts as the catalyst to provide the will to help change perpetrators behaviors for the betterment of all, including the abusers.
21
Wow, Helen! This covers a lot of ground!
Totally agree with perpetrators expected and/or forced to spend time reflecting and showing active change (stop drinking, attend therapy sessions, etc.)
Time for standards of behavior to be set and kept in communities, schools, workplaces, government.
I hope that your own journey of healing has been constant and reliable.
1
These men have no place on civil society - if any network,restaurant,movie, ... attempts to "rehabilitate" them, we will boycott. That will shut these people and their benefactors for good.
5
“These men”. What men? That’s an awfully broad brush. By such infantile facisim no priest serving his parish with honor isn’t to be swept up alongside the pedophile. By such thinking all men are guilty of sexual crimes and all blacks are thugs. This is an insane and an asinine way to approach a real problem.
Justice requires vicitims receive reparation not a head on a pike. If that’s what you want just call it anger and revenge. But then don’t expect peace.
The bad deed is forgivable if the injurer is helped to discover remorse and make restitution.
4
Perhaps you missed it, but Max duPont is a perfect human being. And we should all respect his wish and work hard to “shut” Boston University and NPR because Tom Ashbrook was falsely accused of sexual harassment.
What about the scores women who were mature enough; made their own decisions- flirted and frolicked with these men out of their own free will and choice?
Surely everyone can't possibly be a victim ..
10
This piece is about predatory men who did not get consent from the women they abused and/or assaulted. If you honestly cannot tell the difference between those types of situations and mutual flirting between consenting parties, you're in a lot of trouble, buddy.
8
And surely not all men take out their penis in the workplace. But why are you trying to change the subject?
2
And surely Al Franken is not Harry Weinstein. His destruction killed off the #MeToo movement for me. And when those of you who support this movement start paying attention to all workplace harassment the legitimacy of the movement could be restored. So far the only men targeted are famous. I don't see any stories about Joe Blow, manager at the Burger King suffering from being exposed as a work place predator.
And that is my problem with these accusations and this movement. One of the first to claim she had to allow herself to be harassed was Angelina Jolie. So she submitted for the sake of her career. Well here is what I say - go find another career. She, along with other "movie stars,"were willing to be harassed and abused because they wanted what Weinstein could give them. Now that fame and fortune are assured they speak out.
All of the men mentioned here, are financially well-off and we seem to be doing fine without them..
17
In a word, nothing. We have a judicial system that allows for people to be brought to trial for criminal offenses or sued for civil cases and torts. Once you go to a non-judicial option aside from firing or choosing not to hire there is nothing to do. There are no legal options. As for the campus issues given that is also a non-judicial set of procedures the same is the case. You cannot prevent a person from moving on and getting an education at another institution if that institution will accept I presume him. Other schools can hire a Professor if they so choose. If you choose the wrong path in the first place you remove your options.
8
As in Roman times, throw them to the lions, with their victims watching from the arena.
6
I don't think opinion churning serves society.
6
It sounds like the tumbrel carts and guillotine are out in force.
Please be sure of your fire.
In human discourse there is lots of gray between that black 'n white.
Most humans are capable of redemption. Lots of them don't deserve said chance. Please be sure of your cleansing fire before you perchance burn innocents or those of minor transgressions and improper advances. Humans are very fallible by nature.
Men are learning and changing.
We all are not your enemy. Many of us are allies.
Nuance... or not.
This pogrom will run its course and then be reflected upon and then tsk tsk'd as a corrective era. Good luck to all.
14
In order for #MeToo to truly spur lasting social and legal change, those accused and those accusing should be required to participate in a hearing to which both sides can bring outside legal representatives to ensure that the rights of each party are respected and not brushed aside for the convenience of a corporate or university human resources department. Evidence collected by the complainant of sexual assault or harassment, or hostility/bullying, should be presented and examined, and made available to the accused party via a process of discovery. The accused should be allowed to rebut. The hearing should documented via audio/videotape. Thus a social-justice movement comes under the rule of law. While imperfect, like the traditional justice system, use of this method may frustrate liars of both sexes seeking to take advantage of a historical moment and frustrate companies and institutions looking to protect "favored" predators or liars. Once again, the rule of law should be supreme.
6
I must respectfully disagree. As a former prosecutor, I'll say that adversarial systems like the one you describe are both costly and prone to abuse. In any event, the issue here is not the guilt phase, but the sentence. The author's entire point is that the solutions currently in place, expel and move on, are not sufficient to either rehabilitate the offender or to protect future potential victims. I cannot say what to do about employees like Rose or Lauer. But at least as far as students go, depending upon the egregiousness of the offense, the expulsion should be for a set time to allow the student to fulfill the terms of his/her return, such as counseling or some other rehabilitation.
13
Thank you for your informed comment.
1
I have a friend at a university library who for years has
been sending me all the new books about the Holocaust that come into her library. Sometimes she sends them to me 5 or 10 at a time. It is impossible for me to read them all, but I feel the need to at least look at the pictures and the indexes because my family suffered greatly during the Holocaust, and I am still trying to understand it and appreciate its magnitude. None of this prevents me from brushing my teeth, walking the dog, paying my bills or watching the NBA finals. This, I think, is similar to what the MeToo movement should be doing as it contemplates its future: remembering the transgressors every day, while never failing to move on.
10
Charlie Rose doing interviews with # Metoo offenders is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard. And I've heard many, many bad ones.
I will happily boycott the network and sponsors of anyone who's involved. Sorry, Charlie. I think you should embrace retirement and charitable giving.
33
My grandfather was a sexual predator and never came to justice. My mother blocked out the trauma she suffered as a young women until my sister hit puberty and it all came rushing back. It was like a bomb went off and the shock waves are still with us 30 years later. my mother, father, grandmother, aunts and uncles took the brunt of the blast. my sister and i, my cousins and our spouses are still very much living with some of the impact. I hope that our children are more or less unimpacted.
Our family is an extreme example I hope, but I'm reminded that anything that impacts our mothers, wives, daughters effects our fathers, husbands and sons also. I'm a man and i dont think its an exageration to say that the most impactful events that shaped my life happened before I was born to my mother. our family fell apart in the aftermath and I spent much of my childhood seperated from my father and sister.
I grapple with recent events. I have an active sex drive, much of the time it feels like I'm a slave to it. At the same time I'm able to act responsibly and respectfully towards the woman in my life. I maintain a loving marriage with my wife and my desire for her is both strongly emotional and physical. The dialogue in my mind can at times be inappropriate when im around attractive women though and I'm always hoping my eyes didn't wander for example. I'm on both sides of #metoo I guess. I've got work to do and I'm also arguably a victum. nothing is simple about this issue.
26
Adam, the key here is honesty, which I think you've shown. Your story is notable for its absence of attempts to blame or deny. If only more of us could look at things so squarely. Thanks for your comment.
10
Honesty is definitely key. So many families hold terrible secrets such as Adam's. As difficult as his mother's disclosure and the resulting fallout were for him and the extended family, The only way out is through.
4
Why in the world do they *deserve* a comeback?
15
Vilify them. Make them hope to, at best, be the film crews' coffee boys on television and movie sets because no one else will hire them. But don't explicitly prevent them from holding offices, don't institute laws preventing these men from attaining wealth or power, as some comments here propose. That's antithetical to the way we do things in America. We're a nation of second chances, and while of course I don't exactly support putting these men back in the places they were before, we definitely should not be banning them explicitly.
3
People who've abused positions of authority by victimizing their subordinates should be removed from those positions ... and, in some cases involving the public trust, shouldn't be allowed to return to them ...
Beyond that, it gets murkier ... especially with the call for quasi-judicial punishment that's much more than just some sort of social or professional opprobrium but not doesn't bring the weight of the judicial system into play ...
If the punishment for abusing one's position of authority is losing that position but isn't criminal sanction, then it seems like the principle of proportional justice would dictate that the issue ends there ... I guess the governing idea would be that second chances are acceptable as long as one learned from their offenses and didn't repeat them ...
26
If they are trying a comeback, they should get permission from the women who have suffered and maybe also punitive punishment that the women should be compensated financially as these men ruined their careers and caused emotional harm. This is the right thing to do.
7
Yes, good point. Many of these transgressors have seriously hampered, if not ruined women's careers. It does not seem any kind of equitable for the men to be able to just merrily continue on with their own careers after having such a devasting impact on others'.
3
I believe the men you speak of can use their MONEY to support WOMEN's movements for equality. They don't get to "come back". They get to apologize to other women in their private lives and live with the hopefulness of their new actions. It'll be a far far better life than they have ever known. I'm holding my breath.
9
What can we do? You're asking the right question, at least.
Boys and girls are treated differently from birth. Studies have shown that girls receive more care and attention than boys. A crying girl baby will get more attention and sooner than a boy.
This carries through right to adulthood. Consequently, girls learn that it's OK for them to request help. The reverse is that society sees girls' problems as legitimate and more readily aids girls.
Boys learn a different lesson. They learn NOT to expect help. They must solve their problems on their own. Society, for its part, shows a reluctance to "soften" boys and men with assistance.
So the first thing we could do is recognize that we as a society
need to change. In particular, stop leaving young men and boys to their own devices when they start becoming interested in sex. Stop treating men's sexual needs as "dirty." Sex is enormously important to boys; helping boys to learn to satisfy it properly should be made a defining aspect of masculinity. Organized education could accomplish a lot in this direction. Maybe the French are on to something when they have older women induct young men into how to treat a woman.
Above all, tell boys and men that they they can legitimately appeal for help - without compromising their masculinity.
If we did more of this, both men and women would be more likely to get the sex and love that they want.
11
This paragraph got lost in the editing:
We should adopt a "carrot and stick" policy. Transgressions should be punished proportionately and swiftly. Those who, after due punishment, repent and demonstrate contrition, should be allowed to reenter society.
The treatment of Franken by the Democrats in the Congress was the wrong way to handle people who have acted badly and must be punished or have to make amends. Franken acted poorly and he should have been held to account. But it is very clear that the effort to make him resign was an act of political game playing designed to exploit a potential political advantage during subsequent elections and not one effort to address the acts committed by Franken. The Democrats intended to give the appearance of determined opposition to sexual mistreatment by anyone and to condemn Republicans for condoning the same. It was despicable conduct that was dripping with opportunism, mocking the harm of sexual misdeeds and trivializing the suffering of the victims by equating just to win votes.
24
A very nice article, and one with no easy answers. Clearly there must be away to differentiate criminal behavior from inappropriate behavior. Many men look back on their past and say, jeez, I shouldn't have done that. I think many women can probably say the same thing. And there has to be a way for all of us to move beyond moments of shame.
And some people went way beyond that and those incidents don't get erased in 6 months.
So let's have the reaction be appropriate.
Sex, power, money and often drinking can bring out the worst in many of us. Sorry, ought to suffice in many of thoser situations. Repeated harassment, indecent exposure etc are all covered by laws.
5
I am not aware that Charlie Rose or Tavis Smiley have been convicted of anything. Nor have they been charged in a court of law. This is America. They are welcome to ply their trade. They will be supported or rebuked, or both. It should play out in the court of public opinion. Time for the PC police to stand down.
11
I believe the women, just as I believed Prof. Anita Hill. Arrest and conviction in order to prove males have molested, abused, groped and purposefully destroyed women's lives and careers is a standard that one would expect in a every patriarchy. That's why 96% of rapists never see one day of jail and why civil suits are not just prohibitively expensive but so very rarely decided in favor of a woman. This was part of the significance of the Bill Cosby trial, albeit a man who drugged and raped 50+ women over 40+ years.
7
So I guess in the '50s you would have believed those who named names. Evidence is not necessary. Guilty until proven innocent.
Well said. Except the problem is how quickly this restorative justice model may turn into an obligation of the victim to communicate and forgive. To oblige either of those would again disempower and revictimize the victim.
7
If they come back they should be diminished, neutered (professionally), and kept from most levers of power. Most of these egoists would consider that more painful and punishing than banishment -- which can carry a certain literary/romantic quality of "whatever happened to...? Most only deserve a coda on their wiki entries.
If they abuse trust again, then its total persona non grata (or jail).
4
Unfortunately a lot of men think they deserve dutiful compliance from a woman or women. Our culture has fostered a dependence and women have been forced to enable this.
I wonder if the old idea of lots of physical activity could help men cope with sexual deprivation.
6
We should treat people the same for similar behaviors regardless of their status in society or business or government. We should value their contributions in the same way, just as we would anyone who provides the same kind of contributions. The problem that all of these men exploited to violate well established norms of behaviors was that the organizations and institutions in which they had so much influence and power condoned all their bad acts to continue to enjoy what they provided. That is what must not be allowed in the future.
We have already seen too many people in positions of power try to exploit the personal misdeeds of powerful men to remove them as rivals for power, money, and fame. Weinstein was a bad actor but had the executives of the organizations he controlled rejected him for them, his behavior would have received the legal and professional reactions that would prevented him from continuing to act as he deed. So it would be for all the men who have fallen from grace this last year.
3
Do we forgive? Can we afford to forgive? Who has the right to do the forgiving - the victims alone or larger society as well? What penalty do we feel the offender must serve before we consider forgiveness? How much time needs to have passed? All pertinent, I think, to the content of this thoughtful piece.
2
The current #MeToo movement has created a lot of villains, both guilty and innocent. Of those truly guilty, it is hard to believe that they could even consider a comeback in their respective professions, at least this soon. In the wake of such a strong movement, a scenario where they return as "changed" and are widely accepted is highly unlikely. However, I do believe that the men that are guilty of sexual misconduct do have the right to move forward, just as an incarcerated person has the right to freedom upon release.
The research Ms. Baker had done on sexual misconduct allegations on college campuses surrounding Title IX really struck me. There were plenty of expulsions, some justified and some unfair. However, what I would like to draw upon is the accused’s rights to reform and to go back to school. In my mind, everybody can change for the better, and everybody has the right of second chances. This applies to the students and to those accused in the #MeToo movement. While ultimately only society can determine when a return is acceptable (if it even is), I do believe that even the worst can change, and that we must be cautious as to handle each situation as its own, basing judgements off specifics.
Much like the assaulter, Tom Stranger, in the TED Talk. Once a rapist, he now is close with the woman he assaulted, and has written a book with her. People can reform, and it is important that we as a society allow them to do so.
6
I personally never approved of having a separate system for investigating and prosecuting sexual offenders based on whether the offense was committed on campus or in society at large. We have professional people who more or less specialize in investigating these matters. A crime is a crime. Where ever it occurs let the pros take over. Knowledge of this alone with serve as a deterrent. The problem with people like Charlie Rose " making a comeback" relates to the bigger issue of groups in society being accustomed to getting away with misbehaviour. I'm not only speaking of men. It's not all about white men in particular. It's no coincidence that the sole celebrity to be brought to justice over years old transgressions happens to be a black man and all those "plotting a comeback" are white. The bigger problem is the pass white women are given because they are also "victums" of white male dominance. In the end the #MeToo "movement" isn't going to benefit women of color. Many white women are bigots and discriminate against people of color whenever they get the opportunity. This has always been the case. Just check some of the photos from lynchings and noticed how many white women are present. Justice and equality must be seen as universal and applied evenly. Otherwise we'll always have a Donald Trump or Charlie Rose plotting a comeback.
2
Joe, you make an important point about many white women's complicity and participation in racist activities. At the same time, many men of color are complicit and benefit greatly from our misogynist, male-dominated system. I won't go into that further. But rather than draw boundaries and point fingers, we should be thinking about alliances.
6
The trouble with "letting the pros take over" is that men have written the laws in their favor. We have nondisclosure agreements and binding arbitration clauses at work that basically protect the abuser and ensure women are silenced. Rigid rules about statutory limits and the ridiculous impediments women must deal with to report domestic violence threats and assaults serve men's interests.
Laws must change so women can have true recourse to justice. And men who have committed sexual assault and harassment must be punished--not just by being fired and shunned for a few weeks and then allowed to stage comebacks, a la the repulsive Charlie Rose. These predators need to suffer real legal consequences--jail time, fines, etc.
Laws won't change until more women are in power. Only when Ginsberg and MacKinnon and others in the legal world began in the '70s to fight for women's rights did anything start changing. We need more women in politics and in the judiciary system. We've had men at the controls as long as the country has existed (white men)--it's pretty clear whose interests they've served--especially this latest crop of GOP bigots and sexists bent on destroying the few gains women have actually made.
10
What to do?
There is the difficult part - and the easy part.
The easy part is to follow one's anger and sense of right and wrong and righteousness. In this - There is nothing "to do with these men" but to apply our laws. That is how we as a society deal with crime.
That's easy.
The hard part is that we need "to do" is to rectify the damage they have caused. It is not "to do" with the criminals - it's "to fix", "to help," "to nurture," "to heal," the wounds they have inflicted, however impossible a task that may seem.
And that may include rehabilitating the criminal - but secondary to healing the wounds and fixing the damage. And figuring out how to extinguish this behavior - or it will never end.
These things are difficult. Let's not shy away.
5
"Because to tell men to sit down, to stay quiet, to disappear — cathartic as it may be — is its own form of looking away, and it will likely come at someone else’s expense." Maybe so, but there's a time and a place for everything. It might be a little too early for all of the hand-wringing over perpetrators and their futures. Maybe we need a longer discussion of the costs of women (and some men) having to tolerate this horrible stuff for so long and in silence.
12
I have concerns about false apologies, shallow conversions, and so on. But some apologies are heartfelt. Some conversions are complete. And true repentance must always be met by forgiveness--not necessarily from the victims--they have the right to their anger, and regardless, no one else has the right to tell them what to do or how to feel--but from society at large.
11
I would like to see the people who have kept these bad actors from being held to account be held to account. It is they more than the bad actors who have allowed this to take place. Throughout history there have been many powerful men who have acted as badly and worse but enjoyed complete immunity because they were considered indispensable for the well being of their communities. Women, too. That is what requires strong laws and independent investigators and prosecutors to oppose.
9
One of the faults many of us find with the American justice system is its propensity to allow punishment to go on forever despite its claimed goal rehabilitating criminals and accepting them back into civil society. Whatever the crime, only in a small minority of cases are voting rights, job opportunies, social safety nets and common dignity ever restored. We like to think it is possible to repay a debt to society -- until the debt lands on us personally, and suddenly no punishment is severe enough or long enough. We call irrational discomfort we call cognitive dissonance, we accept it with disturbing regularity. So what do with these men? We need to think of some things and try them out, otherwise have crafted out own lifetime sentence.
5
You mean men like oh...Letterman? How come he gets off so easily?
14
That was a long-term consensual relationship. Do you want to take away the right of adult women to choose who they can and can't have relations with?
2
You are wrong. He admitted to sexually harassing multiple women who worked on his show. The "casting couch" was used liberally. Do you really believe a sexual predator only does it once? If you do, I have a bridge to sell to you.
Don't let your politics get in the way. He and Al Franken are every bit as heinous as the others. The only rights I'm interested in taking away are the rights of certain men to treat women as inferior beings who can be abused at will, a habit that's prevalent in prison, where these men belong. Oh, and don't give me the carp about them having to life in poverty; they're rich beyond the dreams of avarice and will never go hungry. I'm sure many of them have "golden parachute clauses" written into their contracts that pay them a great deal of money regardless of whether or not they were fired for cause.
1
This is phenomenally scary "stuff" - and I don't think I'm being overly defensive; certainly, I'm not famous, and I don't have that kind of skeleton in my closet.
What is wrong with Ms. Baker to think that she can participate in a "What punishment is sufficient/ appropriate?" discussion for dozens of FLAWED - nobody really misses that - but talented men?
(I figure the Times published it because "it's nice and thought-provoking" and a few hundred people are sure to offer his/her opinion.)
Of course, each case is different - a nuance that Ms. Baker can't deal with in a space-limited piece. But I suspect that the real reason she evades this is that it is simply too subtle for her.
I keep coming back to a way of thinking that I think is more common in most Christian denominations than most Jewish ones - "let him who is free of sin cast the first stone" and the simpler formulation that says that we should look to FORGIVE ... "evil doers."
(Let me be clear - the latter characterization has been polluted in the last 20 years, but I have no doubt that the likes of Cosby, Rose, Weinstein, etc. truly did evil things.)
Of course, some of them will make choices that consultants tested as "tenable" and also likely to get them back in the game. And yes, some of those choices border on manipulative ... and likely do not grow out of a realization that past behavior was egregious.
But "let them die in the gulag" has got to be a bad choice, however lightly some of "these guys" got off.
6
The appaling fact is that approximately one in three women have endured varying levels of sexual abuse. Our history in America, our history of patriarchy and our history of discounting, objectifying and marginalizing women, much the same as we have with black people, have brought us to this point in time.
This is what we teach our boys, just as we teach them racism we show them where women stand in this society and it is usually below men.
Just as racism is ingrained so is sexism. Both of these conditions will continue until we collectively wake up.
23
Does the #MeToo prefer punishment or rehabilitation ?
Is systemic change really based on listening to bad guys have a 'conversation' about their regrets, cluelessness or even genuine remorse ?
In truth, most women endured groping, crude come-ons and even sex- contributing to the normalization of grubby male sexuality. Many men imagine their show of desire was a compliment, eagerly received. They expected a little resistance- part of the game.
Instead of conflating a stupid flirt, an unwanted kiss with true abuse of power (especially with quid pro quo which threaten subsistence)--let's stop harvesting the distant past for ubiquitous misbehavior and mobilize women to ward off aggression better and men to be afraid.
41
This article should be mandatory reading as part of a sex ed curriculum for every 12 year old boy. While many sons are still taught to take out the trash, few are confronted early enough to impact their future treatment of women and girls with the life-destroying consequences of being the trash. Probably no mother can imagine her son behaving in these ways--so perhaps men who have already become the trash (interesting and ironic that this term has traditionally been reserved for promiscuous females) should consider serving as sex ed counselors to help younger generations of males avoid the same sad and twisted fate.
42
Interesting and ironic that you mention the“life-destroying consequences” caused by abuse, and yet your comment is entirely focused on the ways those consequences will impact men, not women (and others) who have been victimized.
If we really want to teach men not to abuse, the focus should be on teaching them to view women as fully human and worthy of respect, full stop. Recognizing the profound ways that victims are harmed by harassment is part of that. Telling young men not to harass because the victim might later derail their career misses the point entirely.
11
I agree with you. Appeals to self-interest and shame are needed only when appeals to our common humanity aren't enough. Sadly, they sometimes aren't. (Sex-addled, ego-driven, power-hungry, peer-pressured, insecure, stressed and clueless humans may be impervious at times to the lessons of our better angels.) So, for example, we show car-wreck videos in driver's ed to help sell new drivers on the rules of the road: "you don't want to be this person; you don't want this on your conscience; don't drive drunk!"
What do we do with these men? Very good question. I've got the simplest answer possible. Don't let them back in as if nothing happened! That, of course, is like teaching squirrels how to knit pussyhats. It's all about greed and money - as usual. What sells dictates content, morals, integrity and values, not what is right or wrong, sexist, racist, dumb, tasteless, offensive etc. Also, men have been always generously forgiven for absolutely everything - privately and publicly. And last, not least. If only like 2.7 % women are heading the entertainment conglomerates, who do you think will let the Dogs in?
3
One of them is in the White House.
15
Anytime you listen to a Led Zeppelin or David Bowie tune you are listening to music made by (or in Page's case often music stolen by) a man who had sex with thirteen and fourteen year old groupies when he was in his late twenties and early thirties.
And that was illegal and unethical even back in the swinging seventies.
But fans give them a pass. And even people who aren't fans recognize their talent. Louis C.K. and ultimately even Bill Cosby won't be any different. Talent and morals have nothing to do with each other. If you like the artistic creation you will just have to deal with or more likely ignore the evil. If you don't like what the person created then you will be more likely to get on your moral high horse.
4
For starters, the justice system should run its course in each case, as warranted.
In the court of public opinion however, we need a different standard. Human beings who take unequivocal responsibility for wrongdoing and demonstrate genuine remorse should be given second chances. They should be given the opportunity to rebuild society's trust through a pattern of changed behavior.
Unfortunately, most of the "apologies" so far have not been very convincing.
10
Applying the label “bad men” to everyone who’s been taken down by #MeToo is a misnomer, in my view, and dangerous. Given what we know about Harvey Weinstein (for example), the label obviously fits. But it doesn’t apply to Al Franken. By all accounts, no one who knows him well thinks of him that way.
What should happen to a man who uses his power to assault women? He should go to jail, and for a long time. What should happen to a man who makes a fool of himself with or in front of women, or who creates “a hostile work environment? Should he be barred from working for the rest of his life? Because that’s the practible result of “go away and stay away.”
11
I would ask a couple of questions: 1. are the laws adequate to protect women (and others) from harassment? and 2. is enforcement of the law and prosecution of lawbreakers adequate?
If the answer to question 1 is no, then use the movement to pressure lawmakers to strengthen the laws.
If the answer to 1. is yes, but the laws aren't being enforced, then use the movement to pressure police and prosecutors to arrest and fine and/or imprison perpetrators.
Once a perp has paid his "debt to society", leave him alone, unless of course he commits more crimes.
3
The behavior of these men (and the countless others who engage in sexual bullying) all have their roots in a psychological disorder. Theses are best addressed by a qualified mental health professional.
However, like other societal ills which have their roots in behavioral health problems (drug addiction, child abuse, pedophilia), this issue too will be likely be addressed only by the blunt and ineffective instruments of the law and legislation. No doubt there will be increase in jail inhabitants and registries. No doubt there will be increased bureaucratic oversight, new policies, increased sensitivity training and ongoing posturing of bureaucrats as they arm themselves against possible future lawsuits.
Given the gross absence of moral leadership in the houses of government, the mainstream media has a very important role in guiding informed thought. We need more articles like this one, which raise questions but offer no cheap solutions, which sit with complexity and refrain from rushing to judgement. We need more articles on why sexual bullies behave the way they do, both from psychological and anthropological viewpoints. We need articles summarizing evidence based interventions on effective behavior change. A lot of this is found in the educational and behavioral health literature. The mainstream media needs to help popularize it.
Only after we are adequately informed will we begin to formulate effective strategies to address this complex societal problem.
6
While we are developing treatment programs and public policy options and reconciliation and forgiveness commissions to reintegrate these men into polite society, perhaps we can also spare a thought or two for the victims of these men. I have yet to see an article anywhere discussing reparations for the women who endured ruined careers or blighted financial prospects as a result of these perpetrators. Has Richard Meier reached out to any of the women he treated so appallingly to offer to pay for graduate school? Has Charlie Rose offered to make an introduction for a job opportunity to any of his former employees?
When I think of all the talent and hard work that so many of these young women had to offer, and in return received sexual abuse and official silence and banishment, it is really hard, at least for me, to worry about what will become of the men. Moreover, most of them have barely even taken responsibility for having done anything wrong. They have issued statements with "if I offended anyone..." and "while I disagree with many of the characterizations..." and "all of these relationships were consensual." Corporations hire law firms to issue reports that hold management blameless - like Laura Walker of WNYC. NBC announces that it won't tolerate sexual harassment, despite the fact that Ann Curry alerted management six years ago about Matt Lauer. How can we offer redemption when no one - not the victimizer, nor his employer, takes meaningful responsibility?
19
Miss Baker must be aware that conflating actions by criminals with disgusting or inappropriate but not criminal behavior is one of the reasons the alternative to exile is hard to define but also the reason the movements in support of women are facing the inevitable push back.The men she describes who have to deal with society but not the law have typically already paid a heavy price but at the same time, must not be allowed to benefit from their notoriety or be put in positions where they can repeat their behaviors.The key is not to "pass the trash" but for employment law to allow disclosure when these men are "transferred" or require a reference for a new position.If the misdeeds are in the open, appropriate supervision can be provided to ensure that they have learned from their errors.It is the "secrecy" around the issue that makes follow up and evidence of behavior modification hard to come by.
5
"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."
"nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb"
Do I have to cite a source?
3
No, but you should explain what you are talking about. What are you talking about?
6
I think the commenter's logic is misapplied, to say the least.
Excellent questions and a tentative reach into ways forward. There are men who should feel the full effect of the criminal justice process. There are others who, as Katie Baker suggests, need something other than a life sentence of irrelevance. I have asked powerful women friends as to the way forward and have been told "It is not time yet".
I do believe that lumping Tom Ashbrook under the MeToo label is unjust. His employer made very clear that his wrongdoing did not include sexual activity.
2
At some point, the pendulum may swing and the new standard of "someone at work made me feel uncomfortable," whether intentional or not, will begin to metaphorically chop off the heads of many others, including women. Will anyone in America of any gender be left with a job? Will all workplaces need to return to the 1800's and single gender? Harvard Law Professor Elizabeth Bartholet tried to raise this concern of conflating Garrison Keillor, Tom Ashbrook, and even Charlie Rose or Louis CK with people like Harvey Weinstein or Bill Cosby.
http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2018/1/16/bartholet-metoo-excesses/
1
I agree. No one should ever get a second chance even if they change their behavior. This is why I support mandatory lifetime sentences for all crimes. Hmmmmm.
7
So Ms Baker, what of those falsely accused? I represent a couple of those right now. How is #metoo advising those "scared" into action to defend the wrongful allegations made in these cases? As for my clients, the schools and defamers' insurance policies and personal estates will surely face that question. Will you or your fellow journalists?
13
I appreciate your profession and believe all humans deserve quality representation, but I highly doubt that you have several “falsely” accused clients. One maybe. More than one client who was truly falsely accused? All women are laughing out loud at that.
1
Then why did the Title IX director's investigative panel make that finding? The director is female.
What a silly question to start with, what are "we" going to "do" about "these men." What are you going to do in the absence of criminal charges or the extension of forgiveness? Perhaps the hashtag crowd will finally get the limits of hashtags.
13
The real problem even more than the predatory sexual behavior is that when caught, or confronted with the information, there is the denial and lying for most, except for a few. Until, there can be real humility, honesty, and an admission of the facts by these men, there can be no real comeback or return, in the true sense of the comfort level that those who would be in their presence can have. It is interesting how many were very relieved with the verdict yesterday in the Bill Cosby trial, no second guessing the women, but a real lack of honesty, only rage from Cosby, is what is at the root of the problem with too many men to begin with. That is what needs to be uncovered, understood, and brought out into an open conversation.
8
Legislating "morality", which is what the #Me Too movement appears in the eyes of many, is tough.
5
At first I found the idea of Charlie Rose's show extremely repugnant. But after thinking awhile I am cautiously in favor.
Why? TV is such a staple of Americans' lives. Not me--I don't won one. But it impacts a lot of people. Having this show and the attendant publicity it would bring would keep the #Metoo movement in the news. And It might, might get some men to think about their own behavior. They might identify with the men on the screen. That's a danger too, of course. Maybe then they will just try to hide this behavior more.
Or maybe they will find other outlets. Sex workers deal with all sorts of types of men. Or men prone to this type of behavior might get therapists. They might be more open to talking about it.
1
Rape is Rape is Rape! No means no means no! These men need to held accountable. If they are rich take their money there should be no comeback. Sorry Charlie Rose no matter how much I liked your show on PBS your behavior is slimy and you should go to jail. I am 50+ old man and I was victim of rape when I was 7 years old by a Priest who got away it. So NO, they all need to go to jail and if they are rich have their assets seized.
The day they get released is the day say start their new career digging ditches cause the world always need ditch diggers. End of discussion!
10
Why a "warped" form of restorative justice? How about "restorative justice." It is humiliating on every side of this gender equation we righteously attribute to humanity.
And, about "...our inability to have a real conversation about what should happen to ... [these people?]" It can not be too late to engage in conversation. Why is it okay for you to masturbate in front of PEOPLE (PS, women are people too) who don't want you too. Money? A job? Your law degree or putative position of power??
All I can say to you putative 'guys' is get out of the way or you might get hurt.
2
Yes, Jessica Goldstein, I think people want to see more of some of the men who pulled out their penises at work. Actually, you may keep Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer and Tom Ashbrook (whoever that is). But men like Mario Batali and Louis C.K. are great artists with much good left in them whose rehabilitation will be welcome and a joy to many.
2
Isn't massive public vilification, loss of friends and partners, and loss of jobs, enough punishment? That is, short of prosecution if what they did was illegal? Does anyone really thing that a Matt Lauer or Louis CK is going to go back to his old ways if he's in the public spotlight again, and under intense scrutiny? Whatever happened to forgiveness and redemption?
8
What happens to perpetrators is a serious question that applies to all criminals, not just sex offenders. Many survivors in this discussion point out correctly that there is no "clean slate" for them, they cannot go on as if nothing had happened. Yet for offenders we have the notion of "paying your debt to society," and then going forward with a clean slate. In a family or small community there would be something more like restitution: Admitting what you had done, doing whatever possible to make it better, and earning your way back into society by demonstrating moral responsibility and contrition. We need a way to do this in our modern anonymus society. Offending should not be the end of one's life, but it should be the end of one's old life.
11
One of the things that really disappointed me in recent years was the "welcoming back" of Mel Gibson after his anti-Semitic rage rant. He really should have been permanently exiled.
I already see Louis CK is again listed prominently on Netflix after being only findable by search. Way too soon for him. And I honestly am not sure he's capable of sincerity, frankly, so any "apology tour" will, I feel, ring hollow.
I hope that some of the worst offenders, like Cosby and Weinstein, are gone forever.
7
It is good to read an article that is starting to ask the right questions about what to do about "criminal behavior"! I have long argued that when we look at socially unacceptable acts we ought to be more empathetic by taking a hard look at what drives people to perform such acts. Being empathetic does not excuse such behavior, but it means we ask ourselves fundamental questions about whether or not the needs of everyone is being met or could be met in such a way as to not cause people to be driven to do socially unacceptable acts.
This includes taking a hard look at our sexual drives and asking hard questions about whether we have designed a social framework that allows each and everyone of us to have a fulfilling and satisfactory sexual life. I question things like religious dogma, the unwritten rules of what is and is not socially acceptable in our sexual behavior, the drive to dominate and have power over others, our unwillingness/inability to differentiate between mental illness and criminal behavior, our eagerness to seek revenge and retribution rather than lend a helping hand and seek cures, and our general lack of empathy that is constantly on display in our society. Until we address these fundamental problems about our "civilized" society, we won't have an answer to the question posed by Katie - "What Do We Do With These Men?"
1
Who cares what happens to these men? How many women's careers have been derailed by them? How many movies were never developed, books never published, stories never saw the light of day? It's women's work and women's art that has been suppressed just as much as their bodies have been objectified, and punishing and forgetting these men might never make up for the loss of what could have been, but it's a start. I hope we never hear from any of them again.
14
I agree. It isn't sex drive. It is dominance and insult. Let them disappear.
9
I certainly don't care what happens to them. More women suffered than men were punished, and the men can't ever catch up.
4
The entire basis for this editorial asks the wrong question.
It puts the cart of privilege- that these men are somehow owed something- a comeback, before the hard work of the horse regarding how they show the responsibility for their actions, restitution towards their victims, and a wider repentance towards society as a whole.
The question is what is the path that they can take to get back into society's good graces?
To start, a victimizer shows that they have accepted responsibility for their actions. An honest, not pro forma acknowledgement that their behavior was unacceptable with none of the "buts" put in. And yes, the people of society get to judge this act of contrition for themselves, because that is their agency.
How about restitution? Take Louis CK for example, his behavior made it harder for women in comedy in general, and his victims in particular. He has a lot of cash and capital, that he has spent on himself and his projects, maybe restitution through work and funding toward women in comedy should be part of his project now.
How about wider repentance? This is about living an exemplary life going forward that, in the case of these men, treats all women with the decency and dignity that they deserve. That the misogynistic comments and tasteless jokes are not okay from them, that they aren't given the benefit of the doubt.
Others may forgive and forget, but this repentant person better be part of who they are from now on.
This is how they comeback.
10
The article does indeed start from a different premise than you. It states several times with complete confidence that these men WILL make a comeback in some way. It then goes on to discuss what form take and what process that might follow.
You appear to want to question the articles basic premise, which implies that you think that the default is that none of these men make any comeback. I find that unlikely.
As a woman who fought for equality for women starting in the 1970's, I believe that the #Me Too movement has lost its credibility. Women are now seen as predators in the workplace. Too many men have suffered because of unsubstantiated allegations that would never hold up in court. We are a nation of laws and the #Me Too movement demands that we ignore due process for the accused.
23
The female victims were always denied due process, no one believed them or they had to stay silent to keep their jobs.
No sympathy for the men who are whining now.
5
Why don't schools do a better job of checking into the complete background of new teachers/professors? This is not difficult. While "privacy" issues always get in the way for perhaps some of the right reasons, surely someone released or who resigned under a cloud merits at least a double look and perhaps an intensive interview by a prospective school? How in this day and age can school administrators be caught flat footed when the proverbial pudding hits the fan? One major university had a previous president resign after serious allegations of financial misdeeds; he moved onto a small college on the east coast - surprise! Apparently he had come under a cloud at the college as well. The point is a better job needs to be done by gaining schools/universities re personnel decisions. This is not to say a whiff of impropriety should banish the teacher/professor/student to purgatory, rather make an informed decision.
7
For the record, I am a 60+ year old man. I read quite a few of the responses here and have tried to follow this topic with as much objectivity as possible. Yes, powerful men or privileged men who commit crimes should be punished. Yes, many who are not in these categories act in reprehensible ways that may not reach to the level of prosecutable crime and should be called out at a minimum. But what bothers me is that many respondents in this movement seem highly intent on the indiscriminate demonization of men, perhaps as a secondary goal, but in some of responses the misandry is very apparent. I may be wrong, but to make a difference #metoo will need support from men that does not come from fear or coercion and that is not short circuited by the appearance of a movement uninterested in sparing the innocent in order to punish the guilty.
13
Aren't you being a little oversensitive here? Calling for justice, repentance, and restitution from certain men for ruining the lives of women is hardly "demonization of men".
Why is there so much anxiety about consequences of #MeToo to men in general? One in three women in this country has been assaulted, sexually threatened or otherwise abused, with real affects on their families, their livelihoods, and their psychological well-being.
Let's not accuse the innocent, sure, but let's not forget the victims either.
2
Me Too, as well as Black Lives Matter, raise interesting questions about theories of punishment, yet clearly, we don’t always agree about what the punishments should be. This is particularly true when the allegations don’t rise to the level of a currently defined crime. What is the proper role punishment plays in changing unwanted behaviors? Should it be retaliatory, should it be a form of repayment for the sin, or should it focus on modifying bad behaviors?
As we have conversations around these questions, it would behoove us to remember that, though we focus on negative behaviors we would like to eliminate, ultimately we want to encourage changes in the way vast majorities of our communities think and feel around these issues. This is a more difficult, though arguably more important, goal. Concrete actions can be satisfying, but they don’t necessarily result in changes to thoughts and feelings.
As much as we value our traditions of independence, we can’t lose sight of the fact that humans are social animals. We only succeed when we feel included in a social web and when we value the others in that web. All of our technical advances broaden the reach of our social milieus, but also increase the probability of conflict. Negotiating the compromises that resolve those conflicts is our most important work. Punishment is only one part of that multi-faceted conversation.
1
Comebacks for these men? Time to start a #NotOnOurWatch campaign.
16
Did you not understand the main points of this article?
Quote:
The dearth of alternatives to exile is a depressing testament to our inability to have a real conversation about what should happen to these men. But it is only by discussing the issue, not ignoring or dismissing it, that we can begin to come up with something better. Because the bad men are going to make their comebacks whether we like it or not. It’s up to us to determine what it looks like when they do.
7
This is a worthwhile piece. But it would help if the author would examine her blanket application of the label "bad guys" to every man laid low by #MeToo. Does she want to join Wayne LaPierre in the view (or at least rhetoric) that the world is divided exclusively into good guys and bad guys? In my experience, that simply doesn't reflect the real world. In Wayne LaPierre's case, I always wanted to ask: What was George Zimmerman, the guy who shot Trayvonne Martin, a good guy with a gun or a bad guy with a gun? I want to ask Katie Baker: What about Garrison Keillor - good guy or bad guy? As far as I am concerned, all the people involved in these issues are flawed children of God, capable of doing good and capable of doing evil, and certainly capable of screwing up without intending evil. If we can start by agreeing on that, maybe we can figure out how to go forward.
12
Too little, too soon.
Can we have five minutes to reflect on the avalanche of sexual misconduct/crime (still) coming to the forefront before we have to contemplate reentry programs for celebrity perpetrators who have barely/if not at all apologized/?
22
There does need to be a discussion about what we do with perpetrators. One of the most important decisions we need to make is what is more important for us to focus on: punitive or preventative measures? Our end goal should be to create a world where the #MeToo movement can end with it's purpose completed. To do that, we may want to consider rehabilitation for many men, and women, who have committed sexual harassment. Of course, not to the level of Bill Cosby but to the individuals who are "casual" harassers. Casual meaning everyday harassment that many people go through such as cat calling or unwanted touching.
5
It is time to stop thinking of #MeToo as a women's movement. Think about what these individuals did. They used their positions of power and authority to bully other people into doing what they want. Okay, #MeToo is about sexual bullying, but do we really think it stopped there. My guess is that these individuals engaged in an abusive pattern of behavior, not just sexual, that has no role in any workplace. They are rich, powerful and should retire from polite society.
12
Ms. Baker's column on the redemption of the famous men who have engaged in sexually aggressive behavior towards women is an interesting take on what was essentially criminal actions on the part of these men. They have not expressed remorse, and seem to lack empathy towards their victims.
What they have done is basically against the law, and should be treated as such. Forgiveness is fine, but that doesn't prevent us from punishing them. Bill Cosby will pay for his crimes by being incarcerated, but it took two trials and many women to testify against him.
A majority of sexual offenders have personality disorders--while statistics vary, well over 50% of them show the characteristic lack of empathy and lack of remorse. Since personality disorders are hard wired in the brain, it it unlikely that they will reform. Thus, redemption is very unlikely, and they remain a threat. They should be treated like anyone else who breaks the law.
60
Your comment is insightful. My takeaway from the conversation includes mulling over these core concepts: (1) abuse of physical, financial and social power; (2) abuse of privilege; (3) remorse; and (4) expression of remorse to the satisfaction of society and the victims who suffer lifelong consequences.
In some cases outlined here, “repayment” or “punishment” in the form of taking some power away has already occurred. Mostly social power.
But the comeback campaigns illustrate how male physical and financial power and male privilege, especially white male privilege, remain.
The first form of remaining power, physical power (in light of the personality research), indicates that society is reasonable when it considers certain male perpetrators to be continual threats. If we cannot reduce the threat, we should not allow perpetrators a free pass. They need to act in mindful ways that demonstrate their management of physical power to society’s satisfaction.
The latter two advantages that remain, financial power and male privilege, inure whether over the short or long term to the future benefit of the unremorseful perpetrator—often at the expense of women, whom the perpetrators generalized in choosing them as victims in the first place.
We definitely need to address these issues. I think thoughtful, helpful and compassionate men need to step up and stay at the forefront of the #MeToo movement alongside women. They should take great care not to profit from their participation.
9
Elizabeth Bennett, personality disorders are not "hardwired in the brain" or untreatable by any means.
3
Oh yes they are hard-wired in the brain. Study the Cluster B personality continuum and even better experience them interpersonally and you will conclude that those on the extreme end of the continuum including malignant narcissism, psychopathy and anti-social personality disorder do not change. Without incarceration they are a continuing threat to public safety.
We should not forget the predatory behavior of Catholic priests who also were transferred from place to place and allowed to continue their damaging behavior to the lives of young people.
11
What is it about men? So many behave badly....
8
Because no One would notice us if we didn't.
Maybe we can treat sexual abusers like drug addicts. While no real crime may be prosecuted, maybe if abuse is proven these people can be made to go to mandatory "detox". I know that there is anger management for domestic abusers, why not sex management for sexual abusers? Maybe there are already programs like that out there. I do know there are things one can attend for addiction to porn. Only way you can change someone is to show them a different way.
28
There already are sex offender treatment programs, but they are done with close community observation such as probation officers. Few, if any, have any proven worth. It's not about sex, it's about power.
8
It is about sex and it is about power, just as it is about contempt for all females and a deep desire to degrade and ridicule females. These are standard operating compass points for most men. Even the most decent males I know dismiss females as inferior to themselves. Male sexism and misogyny is a disease for which there does not seem a cure.
What do we do? It depends on the person. Just as there are gradations of murder from manslaughter to executing a genocide, so there are gradations of #MeToo transgressions. It is unrecognizing of gradations to say that Al Franken and Harvey Weinstein deserve the same treatments for their professional futures.
103
Get an attorney and sue the man for money! Money talks! Hit men in the wallet and they will pay attention and be more careful and respectful in their future behavior.
1
This is an important question, however difficult, and Ms. Baker is wise to raise it. The "pass the trash" non-solution is one way the horror show of child abuse perpetrated by Catholic priests was able to continue for generations. When was the last time a messy problem went away by shoving it out of view?
6
I can understand what restorative justice would be for property crimes: if you steal my bicycle, bring it back plus something.
But not for sexual assault. Pay my therapy bills for the rest of my life? Pay me for the career I didn't have because you derailed it? Pay my spouse for the loss of my companionship? Pay my traumatized parents and siblings? How much?
11
Is this about power? Or is it about sex? If it is about sex, maybe it is time to legalize prostitution. People, especially, men work better under contracts & parameters. This way the women can control the situation with the help of law enforcement.
In the meantime tell your sons: No sex in the workplace, no sex at school, no sex in the military... It wouldn't be a bad idea to give them a “Consent Conscious Kit," before they go out on a date.
Forewarned is forearmed.
For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.
3
Men do not behave any better in nations that have legalized prostitution. And why on earth would you propose to throw an entire segment of poor young women under the wheels of the bus just relive the urges of despicable males?
1
Amazing, the arrogance which permits Ms. Baker to feel entitled to decide “what to do with” men accused of sexual improprieties with women.
These men certainly won’t care what you do, Ms. Baker, nor will anyone else who recognizes your judgment as anything other than a colossal sense of self-importance. You’re sinking your own boat.
13
Did the men who acted think about "what to do with" the women they assaulted? Or did they also just hope those women would disappear, never to be heard from again. Unfortunately, for too long, that was a viable solution. Thankfully women are finally being taken seriously, and Ms. Baker's prescient look at what happens next is critical to making the world continue to be a safer place for everyone - not just turning it into a game of "winners & losers" in society.
Those men might not care - that doesn't make them enviable or right. Hopefully you are a good guy, and you, perhaps, should care what solutions are on order for people who do bad - and unlawful - things.
6
@Bob: Amazing, the arrogance that permits these men to feel entitled to decide "what to do with" women in the workplace! And the arrogance that lets you write such a comment! Why do you identify with these sexual predators so closely?
If you want to discuss people with "a colossal sense of self-importance," then begin with Matt Lauer, Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, and Donald Trump. That'll keep you busy for awhile.
And *I* don't care what these men do; I've written them off permanently. They are incorrigible.
Meanwhile, women are an important demographic in terms of what TV and movies they watch (among other things) - and I assure you that anything that would enrich any of these men will NOT get my money ever again.
Women are important - that's the bottom line. The sooner men learn that, the better off the world will be.
7
Rape is the oldest weapon of war. Can’t we all just get along without the predatory pariahs?
2
"What do you do with these men": actually, you do nothing, because this is outside your power, for most of them. There is absolutely no question that Louis C.K. will come back. Because all what it takes for this is people willing to pay $ to see his stand-up or his TV shows. And, in fact, lots of people (both men and women) are willing to do just this.
In fact, Louis C.K. could come back right now and he would fill a giant theatre without breaking a sweat. It's not a question of "if", it's a question of "when".
I think some people, including many writing comments to this article, should stop deluding themselves into thinking that they can somehow make this kind of decision for the rest of us. "He should not be allowed to come back" is an absolutely ridiculous thing to say.
8
@Lionel: I live in NYC and your take on Louis C.K. is pretty much WRONG. If he can fill a giant theater, it will be with neanderthal-minded men who have no decency, and who devalue women routinely.
Encourage sexual predators all you want, enable them all you want - it says more about you than anything else. The people with decent standards will be staying away.
5
I used to live in NYC too, not that it is relevant. You may want to listen only to people who think like you and thus convince yourself that you represent most New Yorkers or most Americans. You don't. Get outside of your comfy bubble and you will very easily find women asking for LCK to come back (start with his fb page).
You also seriously underestimate the power of time and the willingness of people to forget about bad behaviour.
I bet that you do not veto movies with Mark Wahlberg in it, even though he nearly killed someone.
I bet that you do not necessarily change the station when they play a Michael jackson song.
So, I'm pretty sure that when LCK's next stand-up comedy is available on Youtube, in 2-3 years from now, you, L, personally, *will* listen to it.
12
He won't come back if people complain to all the show's sponsors and boycott their products unless he's dropped.
Money talks, nobody walks.
Great column and something I have wondered myself. Other than the criminal stuff, if we don't let these men back into society, what is the endgame? They can't find a job and they go broke and they starve in the gutter? That seems to me the solution of a desperate society run amok, people are struggling more these days and crave revenge wherever they can find it. These men will be banished from society while white collar criminals that ravage our country get slaps on the wrist (as long as they don't make sexist comments or commit sexual wrongdoing).
If someone really can't find a job and they really do starve in the gutter than eventually an ambulance will pick them up and we'll be forced to take care of them anyway. Better to let them find a job and carry their own weight wherever possible.
1
I don't think that Harvey Weinstein, Charlie Rose or Matt Lauer are going to starve in any gutters, just perhaps be having their afternoon cocktails poolside with themselves to contemplate what they did wrong. THey should not have a media platform to state their cases as to why they should make women feel threatened in the workplace or to lament about not being able to sexually assault female colleagues and derail careers..
8
@Jake: Seriously, you're worried that these multi-millionaire creeps will go broke and starve in the gutter?!
4
Good grief, what is all this concern about sociopathic celebrity millionaires?
On their very worst day, even after they pay their defense lawyers and court fines, they will have more money than most of the rest of us could earn in a lifetime. And like the sociopaths in Congress, they sure aren't worried about what's going to happen to you and your family.
Middle class people need to stop being millionaire-wannabes and start defending the middle class, or we won't have one much longer.
I'd be the last one to watch Charlie Rose interviewing other #MeToo men, but not because it provides a brazen way back onto television for Rose but because of it's likely format - half an hour of grovelling, open confessional reminiscent of a Soviet-era show trial. Per the many insightful comments, the specifics of each case matter and distinctions need to be made. But any television show intended for mass consumption is likely to elide those distinctions, and any man appearing on that show would feel enormously compelled to abase himself to the mob. Television and the internet are the wrong media to think though these cases - if there were ever a need for good books, this is it.
6
Don't pay to hear his jokes.
Don't pay to watch his movies.
Don't watch his interviews.
It's simple. As always it's about the money. If no one pays, they won't have a venue. We live in a capitialistic society.
85
We also live in a pluralistic society, in which the idea that "no one" will pay to hear Louis C.K. is frankly hard to believe.
While there are few defenders of Weinstein, there are plenty of people who feel that even if some of the men listed in the article did "bad things", they are not pariahs.
So .. a "comeback" for these people is likely, even if there are many who do not with to pay to hear their jokes, watch their movies or interviews. It seems worthwhile, therefore, to discuss what a "good" and appropriate "comeback" might and/or should look like.
4
Boycotting these men's work is certainly a way to get a message across, and a worthwhile response. I doubt it will change their behavior, their pathology, though. That runs deeper than what they produce professionally. If all we do is refuse to consume their products or patronize their businesses, then they'll become unemployed men who abuse.
2
They already made their millions. I'm OK with them being unemployed right now. For most of them it's more like retirement, anyway.
First off, we need a sense of proportionality. Monsters like Bill Cosby are not in the same category as the awkward creepy guy from the office who hugged someone without permission.
Second, we need to decide whether sexual harassers deserve a life sentence. If we think that a harasser should spend the rest of his life in prison, then pass legislation making it the law. If we don't, then don't expect the man to spend the rest of his life unemployed and banished from society.
136
In thinking more about the comment, this leads to a clarifying thought experiment. Imagine you were a legislator having to pass laws on metoo perps - how would you go about doing it? You would have to separate the rapists from the flashers from the huggers from the guys who make lewd comments, and you would have to formulate different punishments for each. So, for the several commenters who have said that any of these men should be treated as sex offenders - would you really propose a law lumping together all of the behaviors mentioned above under the same category, with the same punishment for all?
6
You are misrepresenting the issue. To your first point about proportionality- yes, of course. I don’t get the sense that the author of this article would disagree with you. I don’t think most people who have been proponents of the Me Too movement would disagree with you, either. Pointing out a range of bad behavior is not the same as saying that all behaviors should be treated identically. Moreover, the primary man discussed in this piece- Rose- engaged in behavior much more appalling than your characterization of him as an “awkward creepy guy from the office” suggests.
Your second point creates a false dichotomy. There is a huge middle ground between putting someone away for life and giving them a television platform. Being angry that Rose is trying to profit off the harm he caused to others is not the same as expecting him “to spend the rest of his life unemployed and banished from society.”
By exaggerating the consequences faced by harassers, you are obscuring the real harm that men like Rose have caused.
4
Who is proposing a law lumping them all together? The individual circumstances of each man will determine what he will do with the rest of his life.
If he was just being a jerk and did not commit a crime, he will be in a better position to find new employment than if he is a convicted felon sex offender.
They belong in the dustbin of history. They should be charged criminally and/or civilly when appropriate or live out their lives in the ignominy they deserve.
8
I think the possibility of women wearing small cameras on their persons will eliminate this problem quite nicely.
5
Maybe, instead of again requiring women to change their behavior, the men should.
91
The #me too movement is casting a very wide net. It offends some to distinguish Cosby, a criminal, from Franken, but the vast majority of reasonable-minded people will make that distinction, and they should. Because one might not be capable of rehabilitation, but the other one is. And celebrating in the permanent punishment of these men might buy some satisfaction in the short run, but it's not in service of fair justice. In fact it's unseemly. There are better ways to render a necessary change in social behavior and public perception.
12
A public apology and some form of restitution to the victims might be a very good start in the service of justice.
Unfortunately most of these men never seem to get it. I remember listening to a piece on NPR some years ago with men in therapy for having physically abused their partners. They would express regret but inevitably would revert to some excuse such as "she shouldn't have worn that dress."
9
I think that part of the reason that many of these men will make "come backs" is because they were treated unfairly to begin with. Not all of them committed atrocities on the level of Cosby and Weinstein, and yet they were ruined as if they had. Society has a collective conscience, and the MeToo people went way overboard with a several of these men, and I think that with time cooler heads will eventually prevail.
Yeah, it does seem like many angry women want these guys destroyed and dead (and yet, strangely, some oppose the death penalty for real killers). Some deeper psychological motivation seems to be at play here in their thirst for revenge, and justice will demand that it be explored-- and that commensurate justice be delivered rather than categorical annihilation of all men who have transgressed to varying degrees.
Meanwhile, a national treasure known as Al Franken sits on the sidelines as his country needs desperately needs him in Washington.
15
Men who abuse women think of them as "its", objects. Some of these men can be rehabilitated, some probably not. All of these people "know better" but are more concerned with getting away with it, not getting caught then they ever will be about their effect of their victims. We need to address this issue at all levels. We need to honor and respect men who are empathic, compassionate and honest, ( some offenders are expert at looking compassionate, but are never actually honest) We need to stop idolizing aggression and machoism. We need to stop moving offenders around in society. At the individual level, these offenders need to be in a type of treatment that teaches them understanding ( many will never have empathy) and expects them to honestly own up and make amends to their victims. ( Serial rapists need to spend considerable time if not forever, in prison) Simple apologies are not enough and can be bluffed. A real commitment ( monitored) to spend the remainder of life in service to others, real service, not TV exposure, could go a long way to model what repentance and changed behavior looks like.
7
“We need to honor and respect men who are empathic, compassionate and honest, (some offenders are expert at looking compassionate, but are never actually honest) We need to stop idolizing aggression and machoism.”
Thank you.
My question is what do we do to educate the myriad WOMEN who condone and excuse the this behavior? Look at the legions of women who voted for trump knowing the kind of attitude and actions he has displayed towards women. And they don't only excuse trump. They're quite likely the ones who blame women for provoking their rape because of their clothes, or excuse nasty jokes and handsy behavior as "boys will be boys" or just "locker room talk".
I have been disgusted by the way so many of the religious people, who feel entitled to judge others peoples choices, condone sexual harassment, double standards, and various other forms of sexual predation.
There's a lot of "conscious raising" to be done.
10
Mr. Rose most certainly won't have a lack of interviewees.
We are judged by the company we keep.
1
They will only make a comeback if women allow them to. Just as many women allowed them to serially commit these acts to begin with.
There are, right now, still HR departments across this country protecting many hundreds of men who have committed similar acts, and those departments are mainly run by women. Those men routinely go off into retirement, often on the government/taxpayers' dime, with not one point of accountability to their name.
3
This is outrageous. The only one who should seek a "comeback" is Al Franken, on a comedy tour with a "personality" who knew she was on a comedy tour. Bad judgment, surely. Sexual predation, no. So these guys marinate for six months about what they should have done, not about what they did, and now want a chance to make money again. They should be prosecuted as sexual predators, harassers, or sex offenders. Period.
78
Yep!
Especially when said "personality" (political operative) also engaged in raunchy behavior on and off stage. (A wink 'n nudge comedy tour for our soldiers. That they enjoy and look forward too around the world. Guess that is to be monitored and sanitized now too?!)
Franken is a prime example of collateral damage. In his case a planned political hit. The perpetrators knew their target audience, and they pitched forked and tumbrel carted just as planned. One might think the nuance, or lack of, would have been noticed.
Burn the witch!
She turned me into a newt! (comedic reference...)
14
I used to listen very carefully to Franken's chief accuser and her AM radio host-boss in L.A., a very clever right-winger. I have little doubt they set Franken up and got a big laugh out of it and major mileage on the right-wing circuit.
I would definitely vote for Franken for President, for all there reasons given by all your respondents.
5
I worked in a mental health program and fired our psychiatrist the third week after I was hired when I found out he was taking clients off needed medications and sexually harassing female staff. We reported him to the State medical agency, a move later questioned by the replacement psychiatrist who felt it was questionably justified. Within the next two years I found out that there was a pattern of agencies firing him over the same issues. Not a one of them had filed a complaint against him. Programs and businesses try to cover these issues up as they don’t want to have any trace they’d hired or disciplined staff for harassment or other issues. It will take a sea change to correct these attitudes and practices.
20
Or large monetary damages awarded in civil suits by the victims. Sometimes money talks the loudest.
The specific celebrities referenced here should not be allowed back. Yes, lifetime banishment is the appropriate punishment. To imagine that any of them will ever be rehabilitated is fantasy. Most displayed in their "apologies" that they still didnt get it. I have no interest in hearing their attempts at justification. We are in the middle of societal transformation, and it will take some time before bad behavior is truly purged from what is accepted as normal. Allowing the Charlie Roses to continue with their careers will stop any progress that is being made. The lower-profile offenders, the students and professors and business managers, need a serious detour in their careers. Let them work in low-level service jobs where their lower status might make them feel less powerful and entitled to harass women. If they do offend again, they get arrested, since they will have no network of powerful boys clubs to cover up for them.
14
A little classist, saying low-level service jobs are lower status. Especially since so many are held by women.
Human are redeemable. Just as felons serve their penance, so do other offenders.
5
I think the real question should be how can offenders be rehabilitated and is that even possible. Unfortunately their actions reflect in most cases deeply ingrained attitudes and beliefs that are resistant to change - that women exist to service men’s needs. Those beliefs don’t die or disappear when an individual is outed or prosecuted. They may go underground temporarily and be accompanied by proclamations that the perpetrator is getting treatment or therapy, but they will resurface and more victims will suffer.
6
Problem is, most of these men don't think they actually ever did anything wrong. Their conceit knows nothing.
5
Implicit in Baker's essay seems to me to be that every man who has been charged with "sexually inappropriate behavior", a moving target if there ever was one, is a priori guilty. Case closed.
15
"Bad men are going to make their comebacks, whether we like it or not."
Says who? Every single one of these celebrity pigs is replaceable--it's not like any of them ever was on the trail of curing cancer or otherwise doing anything vital for humanity. Their well-being depended on good will between them and the public, and now that there is no more good will, they're done. Finished. Over.
Ask Cosby. Or Peewee Herman. Or Fatty Arbuckle. Or any other number of other celebrities who've fallen from grace and never recovered, or never will recover, because their sins cannot overcome what they have to contribute to society.
8
Paul Ruebens aka Peewee is working again.
3
I agree with 99% of this article, but the inclusion of Tom Ashbrook without caveat or explanation is lazy, harmful, and unfair. He was accused of being a difficult boss to work for due to aggressive management techniques that some of his employees perceived as bullying. Should he have been reprimanded? Definitely. Fired? Maybe. Lumped casually into conversation with sexual harassers, assailants, and rapists? No.
9
We have laws protecting employees from damage through hearsay and so we routinely "pass" a lot of "trash" along to the next employer -- the insolent, lazy, troublemaker, liar and thief -- because liability ties the tongue and strips the mind of discernment.
3
They are horrific sex offenders. No special treatment just because they are famous. Make them register as such. They can work at whatever they can find, just like other sex offenders who aren't famous.
10
Except for Bill Cosby, none of these men either directly named or indirectly specified have been convicted of a crime. Therefore, they cannot be classified as sex offenders.
Or, are you proposing, punishment first, trial later?
13
The average (non famous) sex offender can't get a job or housing. Believe me when I say I have no sympathy for people who are convicted of sex-related crimes but neither do I want them to die because the cannot get a job, any job, or find someplace to live.
5
I thought we had a legal system to administer justice. Why not improve it as appropriate for this issue?
12
I was thinking the same thing. If these men committed crimes, they should be prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced accordingly via the criminal justice system. Society has accepted this approach for armed robbery, murder, embezzlement and other crimes. Why do we look for a different answer here? If there is a need for something different here, why not modify our existing criminal justice system to address it, rather than looking for some other solution?
5
Nothing is white nor black with that being said when are we going to hold these police departments accountable for allowing rape kits to sit on the shelves before they do testing.Isnt neglect just as bad as what these men are accused of. We try to look at issues in a neat box and then wrap them up. If all of these men had been black there would be no entry back into polite society. Look at how we treat people who want to make a living when they leave prison. For a change lets look at the big picture. How do we make working in these industries fair for everyone. How many professional minorities' work at PBS, how many professional minorities worked on the Today Show? How many professional minorities worked for Harvey productions. How many minorities were in his self help groups. Did any of these white men go to programs to address there issues.?Nothing but questions that address the world of white men. If someone is going to return lets put some meat on the bones. There was more going on beside sex it was all about white male power. If we don't address the underlining issue of racism,sexism,capitalism greed for more that drives people to act in such a way then nothing will change this behavior except the names.
5
Right after I read this piece, I read the recent NYT article entitled "A Lynching Memorial Is Opening. The Country Has Never Seen Anything Like It," https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/25/us/lynching-memorial-alabama.html, about the National Memorial for Peace and Justice, which opened yesterday in Montgomery, Ala. I found the following excerpt from that article, which includes a quote by Attorney Bryan Stevenson, the founder of the Equal Justice Initiative, which built the Memorial, particularly relevant to the question that Ms. Baker raises:
“If I believe that each of us is more than the worst thing he’s ever done,” he said, “I have to believe that for everybody.”
But the history has to be acknowledged and its destructive legacy faced, he said. And this is particularly hard in “the most punitive society on the planet.”
People do not want to admit wrongdoing in America, Mr. Stevenson said, because they expect only punishment.
“I’m not interested in talking about America’s history because I want to punish America,” Mr. Stevenson continued. “I want to liberate America. And I think it’s important for us to do this as an organization that has created an identity that is as disassociated from punishment as possible.”
10
The focus shouldn't be on these men but on the institutions and organizations where they were allowed to flourish. In my personal experience with abusers, and it seems to be the case in each of these examples, people around these men knew what was going on. They may not have known all of it. They might not have known the extent, but these men are usually known for their abusive behavior, not just of women, but anyone who they think they can get away with abusing which unfortunately is how most of our society sees women. These institutions should be asking themselves why they have a culture that allows abusers to be celebrated and successful. Abusers are everywhere. It's unique institutions that allow them to terrorize others with impunity for years. Yes, kicking them out is not enough. It requires understanding why people are too fearful to say anything. It requires an understanding of the dangers of treating people like they're too powerful to cross. In my experience it's never just toxic men. It's a toxic culture of enablers surrounding them.
7
Like most women I know, I’m a supporter of the #MeToo movement. It’s an important and overdue change that appears to be gaining strength and power.
But if this movement is to make real lasting change it’s important that it be precise and accurate. If we are sloppy and hasty and round corners to smooth the process, the credibility of the movement will crumble and we will become what we are trying to fix.
The comments early in this column are a good example of that. It’s important to know whether an individual was found culpable of actual wrongdoing or not. It matters whether that wrongdoing was minor or major. And it matters whether the person was found to have committed sexual assault or not.
WBUR hired private firms to conduct two investigations of Tom Ashbrook: one for sexual improprieties and one for creating a hostile work environment. He was fired for the latter and exonerated of the former. And yet, in the column, he was included among those who have been accused of sexual aggression. Is that sloppy journalism or a sign of a movement becoming careless and irresponsible? Either way, it needs to be noted and addressed. If we are going to over-simplify this movement into a reckoning with “bad men,” we need to hold ourselves to the same stark standard: good or bad?
16
There's a lot of niche programming on the digital subchannels of broadcast TV stations: How about "Grievance"?
While I with some of the premises of this article, lobbing cases together without nuance - i.e. Ashbrook cleared entirely of any and all sexual harrassment claims and speaking individually with the parties supposedly aggrieved (who were in large part not women) by how he managed newsroom meetings and Lauer raping women at work - deeply weakens the core arguments a play here, which are worth supporting. Grouping men with management problems in with sexual predators cannot possibly be helping the wider reflections on how workplace culture and management ascendance must change - and quickly.
11
"Let me be clear: They’re doing it very wrong. Mr. Rose should be donating millions of dollars to domestic violence shelters, not planning a star-studded return to TV that leverages his transgressions to boost his career."
You sound very sure. Do you remember, perhaps, the "Temperance" movement? Largely promoted by women. Who were very sure about their "moral high ground."
The movement had its own internal logic- and was SO sure about itself that all voices suggesting more complexity were immediately silenced. Prohibition was passed. Brewers and vintners went broke and committed suicide; bars closed- and organized crime got very rich.
Many of the statements from the MeToo folk at the moment have a similar smell of sanctity and certainty. Reason enough to try to think a little harder.
Just as there are women who drink alcohol, and consider that normal - there are quite a few women who like a little "pinch" -metaphorically - from the right male. Men know it- women do too, but at the moment they are terrified to say so. I suggest we need women to admit that there are times when sexual approaches can be welcome; if we are going to get anywhere with the current situation.
Prohibition didn't work because it contravened reality. Total prohibition of sexual interaction at work - is also a complete impossibility.
17
Ask the women in your life - your mom or your wife or your sister or your daughter - if they like "a little pinch" from a stranger at work, or on a bus, or in the store, or on the street.
Then get back to us.
Most of us have endured some type of harassment during our lives. As a woman who grew up in an era where it was common for schools to deny a place in chemistry, math, or physics classes because "we have to save these places for the boys", where the algebra teacher (the football coach) I asked to help me with my course work told me not to "worry your pretty head--you'll never need it anyway". Young women now have absolutely no concept of what that was like. In that way they are fortunate. With the exception of actual rape, most of this harassment was insulting and annoying and not the end of the world. People are now losing their jobs and everything else because 30 or 40 years ago, someone made an advance. I think the howling for revenge needs a bit of muting or I think that, in the future, many valid accusations will be met with indifference. Now that this painful subject is out in the open, I think women have a serious responsibility to immediately report, and if need be, to make public-- breaches of appropriate behavior at the time those have occurred. Those whose duty it is to ensure a safe workplace can no longer ignore these complaints. Men need to understand that business as usual is over and act in a respectful manner if they wish to retain their jobs and reputations.
8
I was disallowed from joining the AV Club.
2
"Finally colleges were expelling students..." I must point out that "date rape" is a very nebulous term and event. It often involves very heavy drinking and/or drug use. It often involves two people who know each other, but are certainly not lovers, nor even two people at the beginning of the chemical reaction that is central to human sexual attraction. It often involves a scantily clad young woman who willingly accompanies a young man to his room where the heavy petting leads to intercourse. Sometimes the young woman wakes up regretting this event. In the past, said woman would have quietly dressed, left, and vowed not to be in this situation again. Today, a young woman -- if she chooses-- can announce herself a victim of rape and get the guy expelled with no presumption of his innocence on the part of those making this extreme, life-changing decision. Are we supposed to call this justice? At least when it comes to young men and women in today's dating climate, we must prepare both genders for the consequences of serial casual sex. I certainly tried with my son-- with discussions beginning in the 9th grade.
8
Your understanding of date rape is limited and judgmental at best. "Scantily clad" is one, a subjective judgment, and two, irrelevant. Revealing clothing is not consent. Viewing my body is not an invitation to touch it. Accompanying a man to his room is not consent. Impaired consent, whether by drugs or alcohol, is not consent. I was under the influence of drugs when I consented; however, those drugs were slipped into my drink.
I know there are certainly instances where young women have woken up and regretted their decisions-- I'm certainly not disagreeing with you there. That's not the same as date rape, though, and to lump them together is reductionist. It creates situations where women who are date-raped are likely to not be believed because they might just "regret it." Do I regret anything? Sure. I regret that I chose friends who believe as you do, who convinced me that I shouldn't report it, because I was just "too drunk" and it was just "a mistake." If a woman is clearly too drunk to take care of herself, saying "yes" cannot be considered consent.
3
This is just so stupid. Logically it makes no sense. If a woman regrets a sexual encounter, why on earth would she broadcast it to the entire university, her peers, and the news? Why on earth do you think a person would be that vindictive? It makes no sense. You're being utterly ridiculous when you claim a woman can just up and cry rape and in one feel swoop destroy a man's life.
2
? College tribunals are not broadcast to the entire campus or even given to the news. There arent police involved. When did you ever go to school? Someone's missing from 1 of your many 400 person lecture and you know they were expelled as opposed to sick, at home, or even noticed in the first place?
Thank you, Katie, for asking this question. I just finished watching the TED talk cited. Wow! I'm a great believer in forgiveness and applaud you for even alluding to it in this current, understandable atmosphere occasioned by the #MeToo movement.
2
Misconduct is bad, whether "sexual" or not, and whether by men or not.
Misconduct reflects the culture of a society.
If we learn how to change our culture for the better and do so, our descendents will benefit.
4
Charlie Rose interviewing fellow #me too offenders sounds like Soviet era public trail where it's victims denounced themsevles along party lines. Except it would be voluntary and self inflicted. I predict it would be more depressing than watching Letterman on netflix."i have sinned"
When are going to admit we've become like the typical National Enquirer reader s mater but still easily decieved?
Which also begs the question what's a which trail without a literal burning?
2
I'll tell you this: when Al Franken runs for Senate again, I will contribute to his campaign.
17
He never should have resigned.
5
First we do need to distinguish between those who abuse their positions/power to prey on subordinates or children. These need to be 'outed' to anyone who might give them another position from which to prey. Forever, or until actual change of character is somehow established. But those caught by #MeToo for their boorish attempts to be flirty or their sloppy adulterous attempts to come on to a co-worker or acquaintance in a one-off situation, these would seem to be a different story, calling for a different aftermath.
4
Do the men who have been outed end up on a sex offenders registry of some kind as those who have an unnatural interest in children? Are they subject to not being able to live/work around women? Obviously not. But, how about a registry where their names and proven accusations can be listed and checked by potential employers or landlords? I would not want to rent to someone who has a habit of groping women in the stockroom as they might grope another tenant in the laundry room, making the apartment building an unsafe space for women. Finding a middle ground isn't going to be easy, but it's asking too much to wait for a new generation of differently socialized men to appear.
I have a trick that I use when faced with what might be abuses of rank. I call it the "authority versus rank" strategy, and it works like this. My manager has the authority to direct my work efforts; that's her job. However, I don't owe her, or anyone above her, any more social deference than I do my peers, and I make this clear when if they act otherwise. If they persist, at least I can often maneuver them into abandoning their cover and admitting what they're doing.
Fortunately I now work at a company with an egalitarian ethos, and my manager is a straightforward, ethical woman. When I did work for an abuser, I used this technique to counter his verbal abuse routinely. Yes, he had the right to tell me what work to do, but no, he did not have the right to insult or belittle me. Fortunately, we were both hetero, so sex was not an issue. I imagine it would have been harder if I had been a woman.
3
No simple solution exists, it isn't like a few years in prison turns a criminal into a model citizen upon release.
Fired from one job isn't going to change the behavior that these men can have been getting away with for decades. Society needs to change where our children are raised with respect for each other and the understanding that any unwanted touching even a pat, pinch or a kiss is not acceptable.
1
When complaints are made, investigate instead of being dismissive and ignorant, in the cause of making money.
18
I will never forgive Matt Lauer and his male cabal (his annual $20M salary with helicopter commute thrown in, Dr. Oz, Jimmy Fallon boxing cute with Trump's hair, none of them were going to "kill the job", the Apprentice) at NBC for what they did to Hillary. They helped Trump bully her and refused to let her get a word in edgewise about what she stood for.
It's too bad Lauer didn't get caught before he helped commit mayhem on the United States of America. Before you "forgive" him for abusing women, remember he also abused the nation.
Even the so-called "librul" press jumped on the bandwagon, neverendingly telling us all how unlikeable she was and promoting the email "scandal" which wasn't a scandal.
6
Lauer also purchased the largest privately owned ranch in New Zealand as an escape hatch or hole to go to.
The Kiwis are not fans.
2
The timeliness of Ms. Baker's opinion piece is uncanny. Yale alumni in Boston presented a panel discussion last night on "Managing in the #TimesUp and #MeToo Era: Confronting Bad Behavior in the Workplace." Our panelists and audience members were fully engaged in this conversation, and were just getting to Ms. Baker's concerns about what happens after when time ran out.
The concept of restorative justice is appealing in the abstract, yet very hard to navigate in practice. Nonetheless, her ending remarks summarize much of what was said last night: "it is only by discussing the issue, not ignoring it, that we can begin to come up with something better." Kudos to Ms Baker and the NYTimes for bringing this issue forward so we can all begin to find a path that honors everyone involved.
8
For men who have pulled down millions in salary, the only significant consequences would be jail.
8
What to do with these men?
Ironically, dating any of these men right now would probably be the safest bet a woman could make.
3
I'm of a mind that rehabilitation for these assaulters should include some mandatory form of making them feel as uncomfortable, dehumanized and worthless as they made their victims feel. Obviously we cannot foist a sexual assault on them, as it's clear most of these offenders would view those situations as a come-on, seeing as how they currently lack appropriate interpersonal boundaries. But if we could figure out what makes them feel powerless and institute a mandatory stint doing just that, it would go a long way to enforce that their boundaries need to be redefined.
I also believe victim education is key - because serial victimhood is real. These folks should also be required to go through boundary lessons to learn how to exercise their own agency rather than allowing another human to abuse them so without immediate action. Perhaps some form of desensitization training to enforce a belief in their own power to change their situation and reactions.
I am a rape survivor. And the only thing that made me feel I could move forward was discovering what internal power I'd had all along, rather than continuing to play along with my own willful ignorance. No more self-silencing for a family member or the creep in the alley, no more accepting arbitration clauses in employment contracts, no more staying with your man-child partner "for the kids." If you're afraid he'll hurt you, learn to defend yourself. If you're afraid he'll kill you, be prepared to return force in kind.
#MeToo
8
Unless someone has been convicted of a crime society has no right to force any creepy behavior modification upon them.
Prison already makes most inmates feel their powerlessness in the most acute manner.
2
@Lilo -- agreed that current American GOVERNMENT cannot force behavior modification, but not so for all governments worldwide. It's also important to note the difference between government and society - where it is indeed a society's duty to institute standards of behavior that bind us together under the same social contract which allows us to get along and buoy the most freedoms for all.
And I'm sorry if I'm the first to break it to you, but prisons (as well as the military) are designed to break down an individual's old identity to reform it into something more productive and cooperative. It therefore shouldn't be a surprise that inmates feel powerlessness - that's the point. That's not to say our prison system does the best it could at that rebuilding task, but that's a topic for another article.
What should happen to these men? They should go to prison for their crimes, and then try to resume there lives just like any other prisoner. Maybe they can promote better options for prisoners who have paid for their crimes.
Why should these men be exempt from criminal prosecution? Why are they different from other criminals? Because they are rich and famous?
How about equality of justice, when all are punished equally. Then we can talk about reintergration into society, and try to make that equal also.
Why this worry about perpretators, and not victims?
9
What to do with those who have been pointed out by employers, spouses, or classmates as having committed sexual assault do need to disappear from their present situation, but where do they need to go? obviously, those who commit crimes of the sort that Bill Cosby has need to go to prison, but what of those whose assaults are not as serious, as in the case of Charlie Rose, who from what I've read, haven't committed rape? It would seem to me that cases such as Rose's still need to go to court. Those who could benefit from a rehabilitation process similar to what people with other addiction problems face, should go there, though such a setting for the most part, obviously doesn't exist, yet.
For Pete's sake however, don't just pass these offenders to other settings with no warning to their new colleagues, and for God's sake, don't elect them president! These people have an illness that needs to be treated.
47
Illness?! The illness is Society that allowed this behavior to continue in the first place!
5
I’m troubled by your use of the word “illness” in this context. That obscures the fact abusers are making a choice, and are in control of their actions. They are not passive victims suffering from a disease.
Too often, I think, we excuse our own culpability by characterizing abusers as disturbed or sick, rather than analyzing the systems of power that allowed them to cause harm.
4
They are not mentally ill; they’re just unrepentant predictors, and they know what harm they are doing. That’s what excites them.
3
They felt entitled to abuse women and they feel entitled to a comeback. I, for one, won't support their efforts to do so.
33
Those who offer no compassion and redemption usually get the same. Life can take often some extreme turns. The accusers can often become the accused, and the judges criminals. I hope that this will never happen to you.
1
I am glad you raised the issue, and I am also feeling like we are not ready to address this problem.
It is stunning to me that Charlie Rose has the chutzpah to propose his "show". Looking at his picture absolutely disgusts me. Yes. They should go away for quite some time and do some personal work. Yes, they need to find a different career. I am ok with them doing work that is valuable and takes them out of the public eye as long as it does not endanger anyone else.
But rape is rape. Some need to do time. A lot of it. That young man at Stanford, for example.
We MUST keep the pressure on. For the women of the world, and for the decent men of the world. This ugly, abusive behavior must be rooted out of our culture.
105
Before Rose was exposed (pardon the pun) I tried to look at his show because he had such interesting guests. But I quit because he was always interrupting them. He was a terrible interviewer and I don't understand why he achieved such stardom.
12
Thank you for reading the article and making a serious response. I'm discouraged that even among the other "Times Picks" comments, many people are responding as though the writer were making the opposite of her actual points. I think that reinforces what you say about our not being fully ready to address the problem... we're still at the stage where we read someone saying "B, not A" and respond with, "How can you claim A?"
More to your point, I'm glad that, like commenter "Survivor," you raise the idea of people making "comebacks" in different, less public careers. I think this was a good article, but I wish it had addressed that possibility.
5
"But #MeToo is supposed to reckon with the misdeeds of all men, not just the rich and powerful. Bad men are not just on our TV screens, but in our classrooms, our workplaces, our friend circles, even our families. Where should they go if they’re fired from their jobs, expelled from their schools, kicked out of their homes, or shunned from their communities?"
Well, they can always run for the presidency of these United States! That's still an option for all sexual predators and abusers.
6
The "misdeeds of ALL MEN"? Are indeed the men on this planet guilty of mistreating women? In my logic book this is called a "generalization," and it is usually committed by unschooled and ignorant people. But how about the "misdeeds of all women"? Should we also consider such matter? Your sexism could not be more blatant that what you have just demonstrated in your post!
2
A pendulum pushed too far will always swing back
3
Even a pendulum not pushed too far will swing back. It's science!
4
So not only are the victims of these bad men having to take on the task of bringing them to some form of justice, but now they are to design a cure for the abusers? If that is the proposal, I would like to read a list of "cures" that might just stop the perpetrators before they act.
3
And Senator Wellstone? No matter your politics, the rush to judgement of a Rep or Dem is corrosive and leads to lumping all men into the same bucket. Sad
2
Do you mean Senator Franken? Senator Wellstone sadly and tragically died in a plane crash in 2002 during his reelection campaign, after his courageous and principled vote against the Iraq War. Sort of a Bernie Sanders without Bernie's F-35 fighter jet basing baggage.
We must not let the #MeToo, student, teacher, LGBT, or Black Lives Matter movements die. They are all intertwined.
OUR United States of America is just now facing the consequences of the white male - WASP - backlash against FDR's New Deal, Roe v Wade abortion rights for women and LBJ's civil rights laws for the black community. These movements took many years - as well as the stock market collapse, depression and WWII our grandparents and parents lived through - to come to fruition. It has taken over 40 years for the WASPs to realize their dream of a hostile financial takeover of OUR country so they could try to take back control.
WE THE PEOPLE and our current movements to preserve/restore true democracy in OUR United States of America are the result of average peope - including scientists and outdoor enthusiasts and the organizations who work with them - coming together to shout out our collective disapproval of the current administration and Robber Baron plans to destroy OUR government and other governments around the world.
Small movements are turning into tsumanis. The Women's March kicked it off and Scientists and environmental marches, the student march and now the teachers' marches across the nation are adding fuel to the fight to save democracy.
Speak out. Take action. Women will not go back to the 5th/15th centuries or the 1950s. Blacks will not go back. Other minority groups will not go back. The LGBT community will not go back. Not now. Not ever.
8
The "white male - WASP - backlash?" WASPs waging a hostile financial takeover?
I'd like to think you don't realize how very bigoted and dehumanizing this sounds - to attribute culpability for the wrong-doing of some to an entire group of diverse people as if every single member of their race, gender or religion shared the same misgotten beliefs and prejudices, or the same economic advantages.
Obviously we're still in a country where much of the ruling economic class is male and white, but let me assure you that this greedy minority has as much contempt -and lack of concern for the overwhelming majority of white people who do not share in that wealth or power as you do for them.
2
Once upon a time, long ago in 1970, my harasser-professor was dismissed. He did not know I was married to his boss, or he might have made his moves on others and got away with it. My husband made sure he never again got a job anywhere in the CalState college system, but 25 years later this same creep appeared at the high school where I was teaching, in the guise of a guidance counselor. He was gone within a year for the same reason. I suspect he just kept moving around, lying and hiding from people who would expose him. The last I heard he was substitute teaching. Women must learn to protect themselves better. These guys aren't going away and they aren't changing. We can do this. The problem men are a minority. Most men are good people, like my father, my husband, my son and grand son. They are on our side.
11
If anyone deserves a comeback it is Al Franken who did very little harm and lots of good in his career both as a comedian and as a Senator. I would like to have him back in the Senate after some serious penance.
69
Dream on. This game is for keeps. No one gets back in.
3
Penance for what? He didn't do anything wrong.
4
Freen - if Franken didn't do anything wrong, then why did the Democrats in the Senate demand he resign?
These men must never, ever be allowed to return to their former careers! This will be punishment for them. A few weeks ago the Times had an article about Mario Batali wanting to start a "come back"....is he daft?! These men are predators and will continue to be. It's not about sex, it's about control and power. The best punishment is to continue to keep them in the un-celebrity limbo, where they must disguise themselves before going out and where they fear their victims!
Also, we must stop not believing victims when they come forward! Zero tolerance should be imposed in everywhere to help prevent more predatory behavior. It's happening today, and this must be stopped! We can stop it by making sure predators are not given back their jobs nor their celebrity status!
7
Each and every one of these men and all the other predators stalking the well-being of females of all ages will continue doing what they've always done: using and abusing females. There is not one sliver of daylight between these rich men and poor men, who also continue doing what they've always done, despite public humiliation, arrest and imprisonment.
Until every society - and that means mostly males - gets to the core of the male problem patriarchies will remain bastions of female sex slavery, with endless ways to rape, murder, degrade, intimidate, frighten and remove the dignity of females of all ages. Fyi: religion is the taproot of misogyny. Boys and men set up this violent system, with a lot of help from some women who sold their souls for shelter under the false tent of male domination. These men and their female enablers broke every society and victimized every female, now males finally can do the heavy lifting of fixing and changing the poisonous realms they've frolicked in for more than 2000 years.
7
"There is not one sliver of daylight between these rich men and poor men, who also continue doing what they've always done, despite public humiliation, arrest and imprisonment. "
This statement isn't backed up by data in the slightest. Tommy Curry's book "The Man-Not" goes into detail about how and why "patriarchy" is not set up or enjoyed by all men.
Perhaps the best approach is for women AND men to be empowered to respond to the perpetrator at the moment, so that, the woman can say, “Stop that!” and whoever organized the event could say, “Bill, you are out of line! It’s time for you to leave.” Or a man nearby might say, “Bill, you are acting like a jerk.” People need to push back at the moment. Public approbation is very powerful.
2
Comparing Charlie Rose walking around naked in his apartment to Cosby drugging and raping is absurd.
5
His actions are on a spectrum of persistent sexual aggression by powerful men toward their unwilling subordinates. Cosby is at the end of that spectrum. I have absolutely zero interest in seeing Charlie Rose on television again, ever. Give the job to any of the scores of qualified women who managed to successfully run the gamut of jerks like Rose and had the fortitude to stay in the game.
3
Why? Both are men who abused their power in a sexual manner. Charlie Rose may not have committed a criminal act and so he is not on trial in a court of law.
That doesn't mean he gets a pass.
No one is entitled to a career. Rose won't go to prison. His punishment is a tattered reputation. The poor thing will have to eke by on his accumulated wealth.
1
Never let it be said that this whole thing isn't driven by anger and vengeance. Kicking someone who may have not deserved the punishment (Al Franken, Garrison Keillor) just underscores for the public what many have known all along about this thing you call #MeToo. This looks like the Moscow Showtrials of the USSR only these people are tried in the court of public opinion rather than by judges.
10
I don't know if Charlie Rose should be the one to interview those who have committed heinous acts against women.
But, he and Louie and Lauer should be asked publicly what possessed them to commit such acts and they should answer in a public forum.
They should let us know something about their thoughts and could tell us if they have come to a more normal understanding of how humans should treat each other.
There is proper behavior in this world.
Why did these men either not know it or not show interest is conforming to simple humanity.
Simple knowledge of right and wrong.
I'd let them tell that to us all.
With the goal of making us all, particularly boys and men, more aware of what exactly right and wrong is.
What society expects.
I would also allow a path back to more civilized, respectful life.
4
This is a very complicated challenge because it stems from an entrenched system of patriarchy and misogyny. Deep-rooted feelings of male entitlement that include objectification of women inform this behavior: how does that get changed? Simple banishment, as the author states, is merely transferring your problem to someone else. I think a multi-faceted approach needs to be developed that takes into account the severity of the offense, the context, and rehabilitative measures/therapies. It would be nice for a start to see the most powerful men sincerely acknowledging their transgressions publicly, then paying some kind of meaningful penalty, and finally working to change societal attitudes. Charlie Rose's program, if devoted to examining the attitudes that lead to patriarchal objectification of women, could be helpful. Maybe this is wildly optimistic in our current climate which is still so tilted towards men's interests: but to correct it we need bold, dramatic measures, not just simple disappearance of offenders. What does that do? As the author states, they will come back and they will likely continue the offensive/criminal behavior elsewhere.
This is interesting as we re-assess the meaning of justice for crimes in general, are we to decide that humiliaton and financial reparations (when they're available to victims, and that is VERY rare, indeed) is suitable punishment? I'm not so sure that is enough incentive (apologies, reparations, and promises not to repeat) to curb the bad behaviors of those who can't afford to pay for their crimes. [And, yes, it seems obvious that our justice system is evolving into one that serves class levels, leaving a caste system of "class action" for the poorest.] This leaves most victims in the same lurch, with no chance for justice. Take the story of how many rape kits have been left untested (http://www.endthebacklog.org/backlog/what-rape-kit-backlog), and similarly how poorly courts handle such cases---even in events where perhaps allegations have also not been properly adjudicated. We're far away from a just system.
Great piece, but I think a part of the problem that has escaped the author’s attention is our desire to categorize people with simplistic labels like “good man” and “bad man”. The author used the term “bad men” four or five times in the article, implying that it applies to any of the men felled by the MeToo movement. I think this is myopic thinking that reflects a lack of understanding of how complicated people really are. I won’t name specific names, but some of the men named in the piece appear to be flawed but ultimately decent individuals who contribute to our society and culture with their work. I don’t mean to excuse their behavior - they made mistakes that harmed other people, and it is unquestionable that they should pay a cost for those mistakes. But when we decide that someone is a “bad man”, we run a real risk of falling into a mental trap of concluding that that someone does not deserve to have a place in society or to have a chance at growth or redemption. This may be true of some of the men under discussion, but surely isn’t true of all of them.
24
The questions is: what have they done, has it been investigated? You can't do justice on the basis of A said B about C. Otherwise this becomes a weapon of destruction in itself that can be used against anybody anytime to destroy careers. Ironically, the best would be thrown under the bus while the worst would raise up.
2
The credibility of the NYT is undermined when it comes across as obsessive and judgemental. The 'Trump's of this world are going to feel increasingly justified in dismissing the opinion of contributes. Seems to me you are angry (fair enough) but shooting yourself in the foot...
4
There is a real problem with the visual accompanying this article, as it appears to put Harvey Weinstein (and the allegations against him) into the same category as Louis CK.
While not excusing or justifying CK's behavior, this failure to draw distinctions between transgressions puts the entire #MeToo movement at risk by giving ammunition to its detractors who see it as a witch hunt. Perhaps eliminating Weinstein from the tableau will be more appropriate. Does anyone even think he is an example of someone who will be staging a comeback any time soon?
149
Weinsiein seems like the kind of person who will try to come back, regardless of whether he should.
7
I agree. Louis CK is a whole other kettle of fish than Cosby and Weinstein and Spacey. When cooler heads get a chance to prevail Louis may actually be able to head back to the stage and use this experience to teach...with humor.
6
The books you burn may be your own...
7
One might also ask what happens to the accusers? Is her or his life ever the same? How will she fare in the workplace? -- precisely the same reason the victim waits to report the crime.
Men behaving badly, boys will be boys.. They all love their $$ - a lot of this IMO has something to do with the capitalist system in which anything goes... so hefty fines (reparations) might well bein order.
1
Former NJ Governor Jim McGreevey is one example of how to respond to a fall from grace. He isn't a #metoo case, but was involved in a sex scandal, where he was accused of harassing his lover. He'd be a martyr if he'd just been outed as gay, and he might have been able to finesse it that way. But he owned up to the abuse of office allegations, and the way he'd treated his wife. He became an ordained minister, worked with women in correctional facilities ... He seems to have reacted with a lot of humility, and never to have angled for a second act that meant a return to the spotlight.
Yes, we should let (many of) these men move on, but that doesn't mean they need to be famous, successful, or rich anymore. They can take the path of Coleridge's ancient mariner: "For he hath penance done, / And more will penance do."
7
You owe Tom Ashbrook an apology. One of the problems with #metoo conversations is equating someone who may have been a 'bully' at work vs. someone who regularly masturbated in front of an unwilling participant at work. They are not equivalent and should not be treated as such. By lumping all those acts together (non-physical bullying vs. groping vs. rape), you muddy the waters. Someone who has made inappropriate comments many years ago, or took an inappropriate picture in 1986, or was a horrible boss and made people feel uncomfortable at work shouldn't necessarily be deemed irretrievable/a lost cause. Someone who perpetrated years of sexual abuse/assault/predatorism or was a horrible boss who preyed on his employees and forced them into painful situations may not necessarily be rehabilitated. We are all human, we all make mistakes. If we punish all bad behavior to the same degree (banish them all forever!) we're setting an awfully high bar. Punishment should fit the crime, in other words.
One way to start would be to abolish the statute of limitations on rape/sexual assault. If 50 women were able to sue Cosby 20-40 years later, maybe it would be illuminating. I'm not sure a lot of the public realizes how many people these serial sexual predators damaged, including Wynn and Weinstein, because even now, many victims don't come forward because nothing can be done!
24
There seems to be a destructive streak in men vis-a-vis women. Because we are physically smaller every damaged man-and there seems to be a lot of them -makes us our punching bag because he can. They would not succeed as well against a man and they are too cowardly to try. The horror in Toronto where a man drove into and killed some women was perpetrated by a man belonging to an Incel group- men who women distain and are involuntarily celibate.
These men are haters. Like vermin light should be constantly shined on them where they prey and not let back into society or back into public media. These men are just fancier perverts who can afford better lawyers. Whithout money they would be in jail.
5
This author seems worried that women will be considered too nasty because some guys lost their jobs and positions. Yeah, poor men. Poor Charlie Rose. Poor Louis CK. Poor swimming champions kicked out of college. The only thing we should do about them is put them on a public database of offenders. Rose and all the rest of them should go on trial for harrassment. If our society can find time, energy and money to pursue people who sell loose cigarettes, we can certainly pursue people who make their classes, offices and studios hell for their female subordinates. The very idea that Rose would make capital out of the allegations against him is nauseating.
13
The problem that I'm having is that the range of behaviors that earn men the designation "bad men" seems vast, from speech, to an uninvited pat on the rear end, to uninvited rubbing and fondling, to attempted kissing, to not stopping in the middle of things when the woman says stop, to drugging and "non-consensual" sex, to attempted rape.
But I'm convinced that men cannot discuss this matter with women. The issues are just too explosive. Women don't want a discussion, and from what I've observed there is no way for a man who tries to talk to come out of a discussion intact. We just have to shut up and listen, not speak in defense of any of the perpetrators, not mansplain, and let society sort things out. For some of the more elder of us, it won't be sorted out in our lifetimes. We'll die fools.
127
Yes, and what I would add is that among the things that has led us to where we are -- and this is not said in any way to excuse or defend sexual assault -- is that we don't want to have an honest conversation about the nature of the male sex drive. We don't want to acknowledge its darker aspects: the biologically driven interest in young females, the powerful response to visual indications of sexual maturity, the extent to which pursuit and conquest are built into it, or any of a number of other uncomfortable realities. We don't want to talk about them in part because we are afraid that acknowledging them is the same as excusing the predatory behavior they can give rise to, and in part because we hold on to the illusion that sex is primarily about love in a monogamous setting. "Good" men, we tell ourselves, are satisfied with their partners and don't face such temptations, so any man who admits to such things must be bad. Hard to have a productive discussion when admitting something as obvious as "even girls under the age of 18 can be sexually attractive" is to brand oneself a criminal.
This head-in-the-sand approach is bad for everyone. If we want men to stop abusing women, we will have to be more forthright about what it is we are even trying to stop. We have to help our sons -- and fathers, and grandfathers -- understand their urges as natural and inevitable, and to help them express such urges in healthy ways.
31
17Airborne: mansplaining is welcome. But I don't think you can do it yet as the issues are so explosive. I actually would like a discussion, but men have to really listen deeply before women will be able to hear their ideas.
I do not think in any way that your comment supports the notion you are a fool. Or all men are fools. There are great men out there...but sometimes seems hard to find. And certainly difficult to disentangle from the anger in the air.
7
Ridiculous most of us see these differences and can talk about it but not excuse them
First it might be smart to discriminate between the men accused of a crime and others accused of bad behavior. Much of the "dilemma" here seems to focus on the latter in that you can't criminalize bad behavior unless you make that behavior criminal. As in, legislate it into the criminal justice system. Going after someone for non-criminal behavior is what's known as vigilante justice: there is an accusation, no trial, then punishment. Sorry, but this is just not the system of justice I was raised to accept in this country. History shows what a dark road this can lead down. Jeez, you could even have the president demand justice after merely accusing someone of criminal behavior (just replace "Lock HER up" with "HIM").
I say charge them with a crime or leave them alone. If they go to jail then they have served there debt to society in a real a measurable way, and then subsequently welcomed back into that society. Otherwise, we have ridiculous discussions on what punishments the mob decides to hand out.
BTW, always wondered why this whole metoo movement was restricted to sexual bad behavior. Heaven knows, the worst behavior I have seen by superiors in the work place weren't even of a sexual nature, but, BY FAR, more destructive. Only in this country you can't work again for chasing a girl around a desk, but, you get a $$$ bonus for firing, and ruing the lives of thousands to raise the price of your own stock.
4
"Going after someone for non-criminal behavior is what's known as vigilante justice: there is an accusation, no trial, then punishment"
Much nasty bullying behavior doesn't fit any criteria for a crime. You see it everywhere.
A woman I know has been demoted and isolated by her co-workers for this very type of thing. Various people have at times tried to befriend her but eventually they can't tolerate it and give up.
I think more training and counseling should be available early on for these people who just somehow never learn what behavioral standards are.
1
Which category would you place your hypothetical person who is "chasing a girl around a desk"? Pedophelia is a serious crime, while calling grown women "girls" is only condescending and rude.
1
I don't know where your ordinary perpetrator should go. But as for the celebrity perps like Charlie Rose: If it's not too late for them to face criminal charges, they should, and I hope someone sues them silly, too. Then they should go away. They're rich and some of them, like Rose, are old. They've leveraged the spotlight for decades and reaped fortunes, as well as influence over women. Why do we need to see them again, ever? We don't. Mr. Rose, Mr. Lauer: You're repulsive. Go away. Donate to women's shelters. Keep your robes closed. And leave us the hell alone.
11
Tom Ashbrook is not a man who pulled his penis out at work. He is one of the best and most incisive radio voices of his generation who was apparently an overbearing and unpleasant boss. While that may justify removing him from a high position in a large organization (as a regular WBUR listener I was sad to see him go), it certainly doesn't mean his voice should be silenced. I can't believe he hasn't already started a podcast. I'll certainly tune in when he does, and I think a lot of other people--including those, like myself, who think sexual assault needs to be forcefully addressed--will too.
4
Don't feed the beast. Ignore the hell out of them, refuse to participate in any "rehabilitation". Boycott the advertisers for any TV shows, and let them know WHY. Money talks, and it's the only thing that some people understand. Just saying.
6
Permit me a story about Martin Luther King.
From his biography "Let The Trumpet Sound."
(If you want your life changed profoundly for the good, I suggest you read it)
Told to the best of my recollection…
King's home was firebombed.
He was in his twenties - a young man.
He was at church when it happened.
His young wife, Corretta, and their first infant child, their daughter, were at home when it was set ablaze.
This was an attempted murder of his family.
An attempt to burn them to death.
King hastily came home after being informed.
Word of the crime spread quickly in the community. A few hundred people gathered at the charred home. King's wife and daughter were unharmed - the fire only burned part of the home.
King confronted an angry crowd from the front porch of his damaged home.
He rebuffed angry outrage, calls for revenge.
He calmed the crowd and reminded them that reacting to hate with more hate was not an answer to the problem of hatred.
In the fraught minutes after an attempted murder of his family his instinct for humanity and pity for those with sickness of heart and soul came to the fore.
Now, he surely knew that counter violence would not end well for all concerned. And, he had a broader view of the goals of justice and lasting change that he sought and believed was possible.
Let the goal guide our hearts.
Men who are changed beings.
Who honor women - and themselves.
Educate young boys.
Engender empathy.
King knew hatred is a prison.
6
Would that more of us were inspired by this good man to behave more charitably.
1
Big difference. This was a crime and had these men been caught, they would have been prosecuted regardless of what MLK said.
People knew what these men were doing for decades and did nothing. The women who complained were dismissed, called liars, and sometimes fired. Their lives were ruined while the men continued to work and, in many cases, we don't even know the women's names. What you're seeing now is the explosion of pent-up anger.
3
I note some of the comments raise the argument that if they weren't charged criminally, then there is little that should be done. I think this misses the point that these men did terrible things while in positions of power. The question now becomes: should they be let back into positions of power? To me, being given power equates with being given a reward. So, no, they should not be given positions of power again. They can get other jobs to support themselves.
14
The biggest reward for positions of power is the ability to compel others to do your will. If it is your will to abuse people, is that not the point of gaining power, and the privilege of those who have power?
Power itself is the problem. Perhaps we should focus less on rank and more on authority. Rank confers a broad spectrum of social privileges, while authority constrains the ability to compel others in certain limited situations. For example, a police officer has the authority to stop your vehicle and issue a citation, but you don't owe them any social deference in other situations because they do not outrank you.
Your solution would require a legally enforceable definition of "positions of power". It's a fine idea but practically unworkable.
2
Jobs? But the piece makes the point they shouldnt have jobs - not just Charlie Rose, but anyone whose been fired for anything that could even borders with sexual harassment (Ashworth). Where should these people go? They cant work again, but they cant go to prison...
Finally a truly thoughtful piece on this complex and sad subject. Ownership of wrongs, amends and reparations are crucial building blocks for any genuine progress in the realm of restorative justice. Even then life is hard. It would have been good to have inclusion of the importance of due process though as another building block.
The law is the law.
If there's no legal justice for the victim because of some arbitrary legal provision which applies to priest-raped children, then for some victims families will settle the matter and there's no need to worry about 'comebacks'.
Drug my daughter or sister and have sex with her?
Really, just PRISON???
DON 'T COUNT ON IT.
4
Men like Charlie Rose can be dealt with through boycotts. PBS won’t bring him back if they fear for their pledge drive.
Otherwise good article, good to debate how we handle justice in our society. Cosby was found guilty but the comment pages are full of sexual abuse deniers. Many people still seem to believe women are the predators. That is a scary mentality.
Need education in public schools, waiting until your first job for training is too late
You forgot the king of “pass the trash” - the Catholic Church.
6
Some of these men view what happened to them as a temporary bump in their career. They have to understand that the biggest impact wasn’t on them, but on the women they hurt.
Rose and Lauer should interview the women they hurt or those affected by men like them. They need to look into their eyes and truly see the damage their behavior and those of others have caused. And they have to allow those women to ask them tough questions.
8
Actually, I think there are a lot of possibilities outside the media. Here in Indiana, we have roads full of potholes and lots of trash on the roadsides. I think a summer of chain gang work would do these buzzards some good.
2
Few of us would prosper in a world where redemption is never an option, but even redemption can be tempered. It does not mean full restoration of all rights, privileges and status. It may mean that the burden of guilt is lightened but not removed, and it may be conditional.
Many in the cohort of high-profile abusers have disappeared from the public eye, but they are exiled with significant wealth and often at an age where their lifelong security is not threatened. It is a different story for men of modest means and with on-going financial obligations for themselves and their dependents. They need a way back in to a functional social and economic life.
We have long endorsed the idea that once a debt to society is paid, and second chance is proffered. The formerly incarcerated rely on that possibility if their intent is to return as law-abiding citizens. Even so, they usually know that their next job will be a few steps down from the ones that might otherwise be available. The possibility to survive and maybe even work their way back exists.
The differences here are those of wealth, status and power, We are likely to see a series of contrition rituals play out experimentally as our more prominent transgressors attempt their comebacks. Some may work; most will not. We all will decide.
10
A very thoughtful comment. Indeed, redemption is a very difficult line to walk upon. Each and everyone of us faces at least one moment where we hope for — and seek out — redemption to have a second chance, and an opportunity to fit back into “normal” society. I think part of the challenge with some of these higher-profile situations is determining at which point the punishment has been satisfied.
1
For me, it's not really determining the point at which punishment has been satisfied so much as the point where I truly believe they have genuinely sought forgiveness and understood the magnitude of their crimes/sins. Public apologies are so canned now, and so much a part of trying to get back into the spotlight, that they are mostly not credible.
One thing we could do is to enter their names in a registry available only to authorized persons like NCIC. The entry carries no penalty. It can't be used by employers. However, it can be accessed if the entrant is facing another sexual assault charge.
If the malefactor learns his lesson the entry will never impact his life. If he doesn't, the entry can be used in future criminal or civil actions. We often don't believe one woman's accusations, but when there is a history of bad behavior the accuser sounds more creditable.
The rules of evidence often preclude including prior acts, but that may need to change if we are to achieve justice for sexual assault victims.
8
The lukewarm support to restorative justice (as evidenced by the Ted talk/native healing circle discussion) sees to belie the intent of this article. In framing the question "what do we do with the bad men", the article seems to portray the problem as male and therefore unsolvable. The fact that the men in question have moved on and are possibly succeeding, is for the author a definite problem. I wonder if I penned an article entitled "What do we do with the bad women", whether it would seem as reasonable. The question should be "what does post punishment look like"? It should be about ongoing accountability, not perpetual punishment.
3
Don’t lump Tom Ashbrook into this. The investigation found NO sexual misconduct in his case. Criticize his harsh work environment by all means, but don’t slander him by grouping him with these other sexual assailants.
18
Have often wondered whether my boyfriend-rapist--who was 23 when he assaulted me--has repeated his activity. He lacked anger control and, as a high school wrestler, had possibly been raped himself in high school by a coach or fellow wrestler. I wonder whether his wife and young daughter know he has raped. I wonder what he thinks when he looks at his beloved daughter. Recently the #MeToo movement encouraged me to once again confront him, via mail and email, to simply admit and apologize what he did. Crickets. Then I named him, and what he did, on Facebook in a college class page. I'm glad I did.
18
"These Men" What exactly does that mean? You lump them all together; Harvey Weinstein-a alleged rapist with Matt Lauer-a man who engaged in inappropriate, but non-criminal conduct within the workplace. This is the issue Matt Damon raised, which I wholeheartedly agree with, not all behavior causes the same harm, and as such, should be treated, and punished accordingly-assuming their culpability.
233
isn't having an auto lock on a door kind of in the criminal realm?
I don't think the author is the person to speak on this topic - buzzed doesn't not a ph.d or doctor make - we cannot condemn them all and lock them away...
8
@Kat: The office auto lock was apparently an NBC perk for executives at a certain level. Obviously, it was intended for very different purposes.
3
Laur was accused of rape
1
Good grief, is Ms Baker proposing life sentences without parole? Even Charles Manson was granted an appearance or two before a parole noard.
5
The fallacy of this column is the equating of perverts like C.K. and Rose to the real criminals like Cosby and Weinstein. The MeToo movement should stop focusing on every creep who touches a woman and focus on the actual predators who threaten people and relegate them to living in the shadows. I’m all for bringing down the white supremacist patriarchy but this new wave of feminism in my opinion does more to treat women as victims which is not very empowering.
173
Thank you Adam, for your male perspective on this. "The MeToo movement should stop focusing on every creep who touches a woman..." WHY? Should it be acceptable for creeps to touch women? You can't engineer a cultural shift just based on extremes. We have to decide as a society what we will and will not tolerate. And I WILL NOT tolerate being touched by creeps.
65
Your thoughtful comment reminds me of something a prison warden had said (paraphrased): we should lock up the people who can actually hurt us, and not the ones we are merely afraid of.
10
I agree Helen, and as much as I once admired
Louis CK and agree what he did is not
as frightening and horrific as Weinstein ,
it still was using his power to
intimidate people in his profession to
unwillingly take part in his perversion, and
I also would not like that to happen to me.
And his standup act and his shows
made it seem as if he was brutally honest
about himself. And Charlie Rose. My God,
that is like after Cosby's first trial he wanted
to do town halls to speak to young men
warning them of the dangers of getting
in trouble with women. What Hubris.
It doesn't feel right to heap all of these men in the same basket. A rapist should be tried for his crimes if the statutes of the law permit. But the boss that got "handsy" at the Christmas party is a different situation.
Other digressions should suffer a burden of proof and deserve to remain thought of as "innocent until proven guilty."
In these cases men do have a right to continue their lives and pursue their careers freely.
31
Who would ever want to watch Charlie Rose do anything again?
34
It is getting worse for women, not better. There is now "incel rebellion" and "misogynist terrorism." We're supposed to embrace these men and let them off the hook when one of them is our president? I don't think so.
33
Agreed: it's getting worse for women, and it will keep getting worse.
Disagreed: you are not "supposed to" do anything. Just don't go watch Louis CK if you don't feel like it.
Let them become boxers. That's what happened to Tonya Harding, and she wasn't even the one who made physical contact in her crime.
5
I will watch Louis CK.
If the women in question don't want to, they don't have to.
If you've a criminal charge, pursue it. Otherwise, deal with it.
2
It is certainly your privilege to continue to watch someone with questionable ethical behavior and reward him with your attention and your money. I'm not sure it is something to brag about and to be so defiantly snotty to women who have put up with this kind of behavior for too long. It is nice, though, to have an additional barometer by which to gauge the silent supporters of this kind of behavior. Thank you.
7
The Catholic Church engaged in "passing the trash" for centuries, for the same reason: it was the easy way out. But in the Church's case, their trash passage was intra-institutional, which made it blatantly obvious that they were more interested in power and the status quo and preserving one's allegedly good name than they were in simple morality. And so the victims piled up by the tens of thousands.
How is passing the trash to other independent institutions really all that different?
5
I say put them ion jail, and start training our little boys better. On the other hand, we can't "train out" sociopathy, but we could do a better job of identifying them.
7
"Bad men" sounds childish and dismissive.
4
The blame lies squarely on the rest of us - the blase non-activists who want to relax in front of the TV and pretend this isn't happening.
WE need to shout it out, with our remotes, votes and demands for decency - otherwise we undo everything that #metoo started.
Turn off Charlie Rose - forever. Tell men loud and clear that sexual bias and sexual predation do not pay. Teach our sons, brothers, husbands and fathers that women are equal and No means No.
Change only happens if #metoo becomes a way of life - a decent, thoughtful way of life - for ALL of us.
Only then can we truly say: Goodbye, Charlie.
11
Ahh. Is it time to tatoo a scarlet letter "A", or similar letters upon their forehead?
Humans, especially certain ones with genetic predispositions & "rewarded" cultural behaviors aren't going to stop.
"Pass the Trash" is indeed what's going on.
Wish I had an answer, too.
3
This is the most difficult article I've ever read.
It's also incomplete. Before this article was written the writer should have come up with some semblance of a solution. Any solution.
Stating the problem is okay. But stating any type of solution is far and away better.
2
The lack of solution is indicative of the complexity of the problem. By writing the article, the author opens the conversation . I have not seen much in the media that even broaches the subject. No doubt the solutions will be as varied as the types of sexual harassement and criminality. I was hoping for solutions, but for now I am grateful for the forthright conversation.
3
Fair enough.
Thank you! I've been waiting for an article like this. I knew the minute #MeToo launched that there would be a backlash or backsplash of some kind. Thanks for alerting us to Pass the Trash.
Native Americans have long practiced restorative justice (Navajo come to mind) and it's the first place I heard of this intelligent form of dealing with interpersonal problems. The people of S. Africa famously used it after the release of Mandela and the fall of apartheid.
Time us "superior European white folks" caught up with the rest of the world.
2
Look-backs to impose liability on schools and employers that quietly "pass the trash" if the trash again abuses or rapes?
In partial defense of Ashbrook, he was fired for being a jerk and martinet, not for sexual misconduct. Maybe the author or editor should reconsider his name in this column:
"BU says investigators found that Ashbrook's conduct "created an abusive work environment" but determined that his conduct, while unwelcome, "was not sexual in nature and did not constitute sexual harassment under the school's Sexual Misconduct/Title IX policy." The university says investigators spoke to about 60 people, including Ashbrook, station managers and current and former employees of WBUR."
http://www.wbur.org/news/2018/02/14/tom-ashbrook-dismissed
3
Nothing intelligent can be done until the anger subsides and that depends on those who have been or feel victimized. Until then the men who have been charged or found guility will be road kill and their carcasess left to rot in the sun as a warning to those who might consider transgression. Primitive but effective, yes?
3
Please, do some research before you compare Tom Ashbrook to men like Matt Lauer and Mario Batali. You are unfairly painting him in the same light as these men. He might have some faults, but being a sexual predator is not one of them.
7
Women's shelters to hide women and children from abusers? Perhaps Abuser shelters to restrict and re-educate the abusers.
3
justice has to be individual there should hearings. there should be a range of responses from treatment to punishment, depending on the precise acts.
appearing naked in a public place is not the same as unwanted groping or kissing.
Much to think about. Especially when the perp is guilty of low level harassment...and not a prosecutable offense.
We as a society tend to believe that people, men in this case, will self-cure once they are accused, shamed and sent to the locker room.
This article points to a potential growth spurt in the "Mens" movement, the he-man womens hater club.
But gonna spend thss weekend discussing this article with friends amd family.
2
Seems to me that the true value of MeToo lies not in publicly debating means of punishing the perps. After all there are many like them lurking out there right now. The real value of MeToo is in educating people in not being a perp, enabler, bystander or a victim.
2
I don't know what you do with these men. What I don't do is believe in the false equivalence of their misbehaviors.
5
I was wondering about the Amish shunning tone here and then I saw the blurb mentioning an “investigative” role at buzzfeed and it made more sense.
1
The left is having its Maoist purge moment, yet refuses to see it. Ostracizing human beings based on innuendo is not compatible with an enlightened viewpoint.
3
Many of these men have been brought up on criminal charges or fired from jobs due to a long, documentable trail of evidence. Most of these cases are not based on innuendo.
3
Our brave new world:
Allegations: def.: guilty as charged
Punishment: def.: public shaming by internet, social media, and mainstream media (these stories = huge profits). Only allegations needed to require punishment.
Men: bad
Women: victims
3
“I watched institution after institution simply ‘pass the trash’ — a term for what happens when schools let reportedly abusive faculty flee elsewhere, without alerting their new employers to the allegations against them.”
This reminds me of the problem that the Catholic hierarchy has with what to do with pedophile priests. Apparently they were just transferred from parish to parish with no warning to their parishioners.
3
"According to the National Institute of Justice, about 68 percent of 405,000 prisoners released in 30 states in 2005 were arrested for a new crime within three years of their release from prison, and 77 percent were arrested within five years." -- Wikipedia
There is no reason to believe a large number of the #youdid men won't do it again, and Ms. Baker is explains that they will be crafty in the manner by which they recidivate, and it is not unreasonable to assume some will act with vengeance when they return.
Charlie Rose's plan is opportunistic by capitalizing on his transgressions and it is vengeful by elevating other sexual harassers and predators to a mainstream media sideshow, giving the men a chance to claim they were either wrongfully accused or have changed a lifetime of habits over the past few months.
Restorative justice is perhaps the highest ideal a society can reach for, but our society is not mature enough for a widespread application of such a system, and these immature little men are exactly the reason why: they are the one's holding back society, and they will be the first to say "sure, restore my justice, yeah" right before they go back out and recidivate. These men would not normally go for restorative justice, but when it's soft-on-crime approach applies to them, they will be all for it.
5
They will never get a union crew to work on their shows. That's not gonna happen. And what stage are they going to use? What location? What film crew? I don't think so.
The opening graphic is disturbing. It makes no differentiation between someone who raped women with others who engaged in unwanted touching, or exposing themselves. This is a problem. Matt Damon was correct to point that all sexual misconduct doesn't belong in the same category. Yes, sexual misconduct is bad, but it is wrong to treat everyone who has been accused it in the same box.
There is a reason the criminal justice system puts the acts these men are accused of different categories. Rape is a depraved, violent act. Unwanted touching or exposing yourself, while inexcusable, is not a act of violence. One deserves real jail time (and serious counselling if the convicted person hopes to cure themselves), the other deserves counselling and some consequential sanction, like a suspension from a job (requiring counselling to return to it) or termination (if a suspension doesn't solve it).
In many of the "celebrity" cases of harassment, it is clear that the workplace structure didn't allow for women to speak about unwanted touching or harassment. Many workplaces in the country should take this far more seriously and have anti-harassment policies that have real muscle. Unfortunately, I guess that won't happen until enough companies are sued. But maybe there needs to be legislation that requires employers and schools who have faced litigation or have "settled" a case because of harassment to publically declare they have done so. Then maybe it will be taken more seriously.
3
#Metoo has been a worthwhile and necessary movement, but it is justifiably acquiring a reputation for extreme vindictiveness. Men accused of sexual misconduct must forever lose their livelihoods and further career opportunities. A la Garrison Keillor, their past artistic work must be forever erased in a manner reminiscent of Stalinist airbrushings of photos. A la Al Franken, they are entitled to no hearing but must be ousted immediately. A la one of the commenters below, they must be socially ostracized for the rest of their lives. The gravity of the offense makes no difference--a Harvey Weinstein or Larry Nassar is equivalent to an Al Franken or Garrison Keillor. And length of time since an infraction occurs, and genuine attempts at repentance and redemption, must never be credited in the slightest degree.
2
So how much bad behavior are women supposed to tolerate? I don't know anyone who thinks that Garrison Keillor = Larry Nassar, but at the same time we can no longer sweep the Keilllors and the Frankens under the rug. The whole point of #MeToo is that women are sick and tired of ALL the bad behavior.
Sadly, men have not listened. If they lose their careers over it, well, it's not like they weren't warned.
1
But men "never listen." Isn't that the complaint most women make? Because it is the men who must change, not the women. The women are innocent and pure victims of the male beasts. So, there is no hope for the beasts. Maybe a world without them would be much better - harm free and totally equal and fair? Why do many women prefer to work for men and not for women?
My son, a gender specialist, tells me that sex education in California, our bastion of liberal and progressive norms, is less than deplorable. How can we expect anyone to understand their own sexual motivations, much less others if they are left to finding out for themselves, and even worse, by the marketplace!
1
Is it really appropriate to include Tom Ashbrook in this round of me-too perpetrators? For the record, he was found not guilty of sexual misconduct by two independent, outside investigations.
Tom was one of country's greatest talk show hosts, a voice balanced reason in a cacophony of fake news. Not only is Tom paying too high a price for his non-sexual misconduct but the public is paying too high a price.
That is a question worth asking as well. Are we, the public, willing to give up men who have contributed great value to society?
3
This is a really gnarly subject. I see a prior question: what role, if any, do you want to criminal justice system to play in dealing with sexual assault and/or harassment?
The Me Too movement has rejected the criminal justice system for understandable reasons. Women victims have forever been treated abysmally by that system. So many cases are now dealt with in ad hoc administrative procedures in the workplace or school. Those processes offer women quicker relief. But they often also deny the accused due process protections.
It's a flawed process, one that leaves men - some of whom may be guilty as sin and others not - feeling that they've been unfairly judged. The question dealt with in this column is how do we deal with these aggrieved men? It's the wrong question. The right question is how can sexual assault cases be fairly adjudicated now that the criminal justice system and the quasi judicial administrative processes have been found wanting?
1
Found out harassers should be treated just like found out criminals. Once they pay the price, they should be back in society with a second chance. If someone harasses someone at a job, fire them. The penalty shouldn't be loss of employment for life, just that one job. If they crossed a legal line, then that next job should be after their jail sentence is completed. I don't think you need to reinvent the wheel for this particular class of bad/criminal behavior.
2
For Pete’s sake, stop saying “as a journalist” as if the title comes with some special status. Doctors and lawyers are specially qualified. Teachers are credentialed. Alex Jones could call himself a journalist.
2
I have a different perspective on this equation. The ability to abuse women and get away with it has been the fundamental driver of the will to power for a significant percentage of the people who have shaped society throughout history. Dare I say that this might be the reason that we are no longer living as hunter-gatherers? It is certainly a profound part of that mix.
So here we are in the 21st century, finally grappling with the mechanism that got us here, and since I've introduced a machine metaphor, you can't fix a machine until you understand how it works.
Forbidding this behavior and punishing or censuring those who do it is necessary but it won't solve the underlying problem, which is that many men will go to extraordinary lengths to obtain the ability to abuse women with impunity. That is the root cause, and until we grapple with it at the source, it's band-aids and whack-a-mole.
The ancient Greeks used the myth of the Hydra to explain this sort of approach. Chop off one head and it grows two more, somewhere else. Continue to forbid, censure and punish. That will protect many women from this behavior, which is necessary and good. But don't expect it to go disappear because it won't, until we find an entirely new way of selecting our leaders.
These men should participate in mandatory counseling specifically designed to address impulse control. The training should be lengthy and specific and it should involve makings amends to their victims in writing and financially. And of course, there should be prosecution when warranted. This is a mental illness as much as a criminal issue.
1
These men hurt people and ruined lives. If there is a solution to this, some part of it must lie in them seeing this fact. And most importantly seeing that all that harm arose directly from the power they were given, that was taken away, and that they now seek to regain. I see no evidence that these men are now better equipped to wield such power over others.
8
When I read the title of this essay, I had one immediate gut response. I know I’m supposed to go high when they go low, but all I could hear was this refrain:
lock them up! Lock them up! Lock them up!
6
If a man made a one-time mistake with a woman and paid a price for it – prison for a rapist, criminal probation and expulsion from school for a sexual assault on another student -- then it probably makes sense for us to expend effort at rehabilitation, forgiveness and acceptance into society.
If a man was a repeat offender and suffered only the loss of his job, then there is no duty to scurry around after a few months to help a man who made vile choices over a period of time at the expense of vulnerable women.
The justification given by Katie J.M. Baker, the author of this article, is simple: “[T]he bad men are going to make their comebacks whether we like it or not.”
As an older man with an adult daughter and a young granddaughter, I don’t think this is a persuasive argument.
1
Oh, and one thing "we" can do about "these men" is try to avoid bitterness or vindictiveness, for "our" own sake. As we know, we live in an imperfect world where evil is not always punished and good not always rewarded, and misdeeds cannot be made to unhappen. The idea that "these men" will never suffer enough for the pain they caused is self-defeating in the end. Much wiser, as I said in the last post, to push them to one side and move forward, minimizing the possibilities of this kind of thing happening in the future by strengthening and enforcing anti-harassment laws and incentivize ASAP reporting of incidences.
1
I would delight in hearing their own stories and perhaps Charlie Rose could have a one on one interview with each of has accusers. This has been a troubling loss of a great mind and great interviewer.
I would not "delight" in hearing any of their stories. These men have enough money to live comfortably for the rest of their lives. They could avoid the limelight and work behind the scenes to help change the toxic culture they have propagated. Making a public comeback and then basking in one's reformation is disgusting. Sadly, a show like this will probably generate high ratings thanks to a culture enthralled by watching people who behave badly. Ignore these men and don't give them a public forum. The thought of any of them exploiting their behavior and getting richer from it makes me sick.
5
I do not in any way view Rose as a great mind or a great interviewer.
1
There can be no redemption for these men unless they understand and confess their guilt. Most of the famous and not famous people are unwilling to confess and make recompense because they are innately protecting their assets and station in life. It seems very few are willing to take this step.
Chuck Colson is an example of someone who did redeem himself. After he did his time for his participation in the Watergate scandal, he committed his life to working with inmates and prisoners to help them reform as he had.
For some reason I do not think we will see Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey nor very many men following this example.
14
I do think we have to consider the offenses and crimes on a spectrum. Quite a few of these men did not commit violent acts against anyone, and deserve the opportunity to apologize, and to rehabilitate their careers or pursue a livelihood. I think the best way to move forward would be for each organization and/or industry association to come up with legal processes or regulations that work for them, and stick with them. But many men (and women -- there have been female executives who have sexually harassed or assaulted people too) who have made mistakes, errors in judgment, misinterpreted interest, behaved inappropriately or whatever, can and should be "rehabilitated" and allowed to return to their careers and lives.
6
The funny thing is, given the momentum established by the #Me Too movement to date, there is no place for these men to comeback too. That place, is gone. They have been named and are now the very symbols of a system that was of step with the times. That said, some are more guilty than others. Maybe in time there can be a sifting process that isolates the very heinous from the not so heinous. But for now any talk of comebacks is very very premature.
8
The interesting part of many arguments is the premise. In this case, the question presumes that there's a "we", who have the power to decide the fate of perpetrators of rape and sexual assault.
That would be a good problem to have. At this point, anything that chips away at the impunity of powerful perpetrators is a step in the right direction. Of course they'll continue their studies and their careers, but some will be confronted and punished, and they'll continue their lives in a less prestigious or less lucrative position than they would be in if they'd kept their hands to themselves. If we can change that from "some" to "most", that's good enough. Regardless of the details of what happens to the perps later, that would be enough to change cultural assumptions about rape and sexual assault. And that cultural change is what counts. It's what will enable women to live their lives free of the burdens imposed by constant risk, routine minor traumas, and occasional not-so-minor ones.
5
The best thing to do, if "these men" indeed are ill-advised enough to attempt "comebacks" into whatever public favor they enjoyed before their downfalls, is trivialize them. As we know, sexual harassment and assault are about exerting power over another person. The less power they have, the less likely they are to fall back on old bad habits.
They'll never be punished enough to suit some people. It's unlikely that Bill Cosby, at 80, will actually spend a day in jail, but his reputation and legacy are tarnished forever by the scandal. Social marginalization of undesirables works just as well in the grown-up world as it did in high school. It's unrealistic to expect "these man" to disappear altogether, but they can be made not to matter.
An honest and genuine attempt at redemption, as opposed to simply trying to regain favor (or, worse, sympathy), is another thing altogether. Nobody should be denied a sporting chance at that.
11
Katie, there is no "reasonable" or fair answer to the futures of the accused. As you wrote, "The dearth of alternatives to exile is a depressing testament to our inability to have a real conversation about what should happen to these men." That is the crux of the matter and at least for the time being, there are no solutions.
These men are like released prisoners who go on living, but with frequently overwhelming conditions (clearly of their own making) to overcome. Not a good place to be and there are really no viable solutions to present.
3
Sister Helen Prejean likely has some ideas and solutions.
1
There is a lot about the death penalty but nothing I can find specifically about #MeToo.
Please be more specific. Thank you.
What I meant was, the counseling that she offered to help people come to terms with their spiritual life.
Important piece. "What do we do with these guys?" Is a very tough question. One blindingly evident example of what not to do was and is being provided by the Catholic Church past masters for decade upon decade of a failed - for the victims and society - "pass the trash strategy" that saw pedophile priests move from one position in the Church to another with no notice to parishioners and sometimes little to those at the lower rungs of the church hierarchy. The Catholic Church with all its resources, alleged commitment to forgiveness and sad to say long "experience" in dealing with these issues has failed miserably. What can we learn from their ongoing inability to properly address the issue? Certainly transparency; something the Catholic Church avoided and continues to avoid is key to any solution. The other key problem will be "gradations of offence". But let's not forget "unconsented to touching" is typically the legal definition of assault. So all those people saying "Bob was just a bit handsy" need to understand Bob committed a crime. More importantly, Bob needs to understand he committed a crime. So education is also key. But as we have seen and are seeing with the Catholic Church even when institutions have their feet held to the fire on these issues they still don't get it right. Final point money. Like all things in life if you want to effect change make those responsible pay. Money is something both the perpetrators and the institutions that protect them understand.
20
Is there not any hope that people can change? Confront their victims and wrong doing and ask forgiveness?
And can women who have been wronged ever accept anything but exile to those men? Are women capable of forgiveness? What do they want if these men if not change and atonement?
And is a rapist the same as someone who harassed or said bad stuff?
American society is good on punishment, look at our prisons, but does not allow rehabilitation, forgiveness or the possibility that people can change.
And we all pay the price.
35
Two questions that never seem to be addressed regarding sexual harassment: (1) Are only men capable of sexual harassment? (2) What about those (men or women) who are falsely accused of sexual harassment? It seems responsible, factual journalism would investigate and discuss one or both of those issues.
As for punishment and consequences: is there a difference between actions that seem to involve serious psychological problems (Weinstein, for instance) and actions that are far less extreme?
Revenge may be sweet, but whether it's necessary to always ruin forever the lives of those accused seems questionable.
Doug Giebel, Big Sandy, Montana
8
Let me get this straight. We’re to trust school administrators - amateurs at conducting investigations and prosecutions - to become cop, prosecutor, judge and jury in these cases. Following the inevitable guilty verdict, we’re to label the guilty as “trash” unworthy of ever again rejoining our society. The people I know who advocate for this approach are often the same people who rail against the prison industrial complex and the school-to-prison pipeline, citing the lack of due process for the accused. Can someone help me reconcile this apparent contradiction?
25
How people choose to reconcile with the abusers of their past is solely their personal choice. There is no right or wrong way to do it. Some people are vengeful while others are more forgiving. It is simply wrong for us to put ourselves in the shoes of the victim and say that they ought to have taken a certain path - how can we even remotely feel what they have gone through ?
People like Weinstein, Rose, Lauer etc. are monsters. And monsters will try to come back. They always do. Will they have a market ? Yes. There is a market for deplorable nonsense. The National Enquirer is actually profitable. Breitbart is thriving. Fox News has more viewership than NBC and so on..
What we can do is to mitigate the level of attention that these men might generate upon their comeback. Think about ways to keep them defensive and more importantly from becoming a threat again. There are many socially compatible ways to do that including creating a museum to highlight the advances in civil rights (#MeToo is really a civil rights movement), maintaining logs of sexual predators and constantly highlighting them, making the teaching of abusive history a necessary element at our schools etc. In the end, what we are really after as a society is to stop these things from happening as opposed to just punishing these men. Punishment is tactical. Proactive negation is strategic.
14
I believe men will view women as very dangerous and unpredictable. They will retreat from them, especially in the workplace. As far as the "bad men". They will clearly be angry. Men are biologically designed to primarily pro-create. This will not change. Most men consider that the woman has the upper hand in sex, which makes them more angry and frustrated. The recent vehicle attack in Toronto is an example of these issues, albeit extreme. I see a hardening of the male female strained relations, more violence and plotting against women. The old saying, men love in haste, but lust in hate will become evident. We need to have more efforts at mutual respect, understanding the differences between men and women, and harmony together. I see very little of that today.
4
Clearly, we need fewer males born for a generation or two.
3
Mary, I disagree. To my observation, the younger men are more evolved than in my generation. Today it's more apt to be the older rich guys addicted to power getting their just desserts.
If Albert Einstein or Jonas Salk were considering a return to the public arena I think the world should be forgiving after assurances that there is authentic remorse and real understanding of why their behavior is so offensive. Those men's contributions to society would be mitigating and offsetting. But Matt Lauer? Mario Batali? Charlie Rose? Give me a break. Leave them on the Elba they've earned and reward people in their vaarious professions who are equally talented but not misogynistic.
20
If the perpetrators of sexual assault are really serious about re-entering society, then they have to clearly demonstrate that they are seeking appropriate help for their pathological behavior. And they have to be committed to genuine change which means they probably need long-term (if not lifetime) treatment and monitoring.
15
What's disappointing is that Ms. Baker seems to want binary labels such as "bad" to stick forever, under the guise of flagging a future problem. The problem is the moral superiority of this position - is a burglar less "bad" than a "robber" because the burglar steals property and doesn't confront and scare a human? Is Louie CK less "bad" than Harvey? Or is the position that the crimes these men committed are more egregious than felonies, including rape, because they were powerful and inappropriately used their stature and influence for their wrongful and often criminal conduct?
In the cases of the burglar and the robber, both of those criminals - who moved through the criminal justice system, as decrepit as it is, and lost -- deserve a place in society after their crimes without the badge of "bad" slapped on them for life. Would Ms. Baker send them to a special colony so they could rob and burglarize each other for the rest of their lives?
Writing articles without suggestion real answers or just stirring the pot of hatred for a class of "bad" people doesn't seem to move the ball much. I'm surprised I'm alone in this view, but so be it.
8
Perhaps this is a moment to ponder about how power works, power being the underlying force and enabler for (some) men to exploit others, in this case women, and in the worst way, sexually, by leveraging power while instilling fear through threats.
Metoo is, and will remain, the cry for an end to this mean and nasty power that men extended over women throughout most history. But it does not have to be this way!
Looking at Nordic countries we see a comprehensive approach to addressing this historic blight; to face old societal deficiencies squarely and manage gender relationships on egalitarian basis.
America, we have to face it, is a very violent country, armed to the teeth, a bickering society, plagued by devastating ignorance, religious zealotry and political malfeasance.
I, for one, believe that the MeToo can start ringing the bells of a nationwide need to confront out demons. And there are no worse demons but the need to power over others, in this case women, for they were, in effect, 'others' - others without power!
5
Some of these men belong in jail. But short of that, do many of these otherwise good, smart, talented men belong on what I call the "scrapheap of humanity"? No.
Yes, they acted badly. But their actions and attitudes toward women were not created in a vacuum. They were products of a culture, where women share some of the responsibility -- part "boys will be boys" and part "women afraid to speak up and out for themselves."
Now that the culture is changing, good men will change, too. If they don't, they are not good men.
13
Our society which is supposed to be a nation of laws is massively corrupt. Today's article, Tracking Graft, From the Bootlegger to the Mayor, By ALAN FEUER, demonstrates the corruption of our religious leaders, politicians, police and the business community, etc. There are between 11 and 20 million illegal immigrants in the USA and they are supported by the ACLU and the Democratic Party. But I'm supposed to outraged by the sexual misconduct of powerful men. Sorry, I have no outrage left. There is no Social Contract. We have no right to expect that people will follow rules. You have no right to expect that I will follow rules except that I fear being crushed by powerful government insiders. If I have any outrage at the sexual predators, it is that they were pointing fingers at others while they were engaging in their assaults. Bill Cosby was found guilty based on his own testimony which was obtained after he was promised it would not be used in criminal prosecutions. So there are no rules and no binding agreements. There is no Social Contract. Women may feel better about these powerful men being pulled down but don't be fooled, there is no guarantee that it will last more than a day.
1
You are asking the wrong question Ms. Baker. The question is not what to do with them but how men come to see women as so valueless they can inflict themselves in any way they choose upon their person. And further, how the entertainment and news business foists that probability onto the public creating yet another tier of abuse.
Watch the way Fox news treats women. Watch the men who talk down to them and say demeaning things. It's really no secret to anyone with eyes that Hollywood has for the last 40 years aggrandized the idea that any man with almost nothing to offer can get the "best babe". We find now that is because men with leverage in Hollywood predate to that end. Sitcoms are rife with odious narcissistic men who behave like little boys with wives and girlfriends who do everything for them and in turn are roundly harassed and turned into shrews within the context of the story.
And what happens in the home? What do men see that convinces them they can prey on women? What convinces them that what they want is all that is important?
That is the question. Now what to do with them once they've been discovered. How to stop this behavior in the first place is where we should focus our attention.
33
A comeback future for the sexual assaulters can be predicted...as long as they are not allowed to gain power of an office that allows them access to old tricks. It must be similar to the disbarment of corrupt lawyers from their professional association, perhaps obligate them to civics by way of serving, finally, a worthwhile endeavor. This, under concurrent supervision of responsible and proficient regulators. Lest we forget, we are dealing with 'criminals' that abused their station for longer than we care to admit, in part due to the rest of us looking the other way, even complicit by remaining silent.
What do we do with these men? Why we celebrate them. We let them open nba games and we decry their unfair persecution. After all, that is what we do with men who make their career advocating gun violence, the advocacy of violence and crimes against women. We should publish editorials heralding these men. We should treat them just like we treat Meek Mills.
2
"Restorative justice ... [may be]... complex and imperfect," but mere Justice is complex and imperfect too.
Thank you for this editorial. I too was abused as a child by a young man, my baby-sitter. I do not know where he is. He was not incarcerated as a result of his actions because my parents did not know until years later.
However, I hope he was either helped or incarcerated--assuming statistically--I was not his only victim.
Let's not forget the Treaty of Versaille's failure because it was based on vengeance rather than a lasting peace and how it created a field ripe for Nazism.
These men are our criminals; as a society it is our duty to acknowledge our collective failure with their individual misdeeds and rectify where and when possible.
5
I hope the victims of #me too have the courage to see their grievances through the court system, as Bill Cosby's accusers did. That's one, obvious answer.
6
Where to start? When societies, cultures, civilizations believe that power means control, when parents teach their children to “fight” back, when leaders believe their rights are inherently superior to those they lead (serve), when relationships teach distrust and fear over trust and love, when taking matters more than giving, we will continue to aid and abet abusive men — and women. No one and nothing is “trash.” May this be our first understanding.
5
Not everyone "me-too'd" is a celebrity. A friend of mine found himself featured n the NYT for behaviour as a professor. He resigned the next day from a department that he founded 20 or so years ago, and had a show in a major museum summarily canceled. It looks like career over. This is not the place to debate the degree of his culpability. But what is clear is that a single article can ruin a career, with no real appeal. And after his resignation, there was a call on the social media to have his pension stopped -- even though the University in question didn't have a pension plan. I think Katie Baker's tentatively proposed idea for conversation and reconciliation is a small improvement on what happens now, which is the application of a scarlet letter, with no nuance or understanding of the reality of each accusation. These, as the Cosby trial(s), can only be established in a court of law. The press is not the place to try people.
13
You seem to say, "leave it to the courts," to sort out without any extra-judicial consequences to fall on these people. Nonsense. All of our actions have consequences outside the legal setting, particularly in the employment setting. Forget violating the law, forget sexual harassment, if I came to my office and merely acted disrespectful in a way that violated our social/professional norms, I would be fired on the spot. Further, as I work in a talkative industry, I would have a lot of trouble finding a new job afterward. And, I could only blame myself for it, not on a newspaper or a gossip.
Now, when someone, like your friend, not only shows disrespect to people in his professional capacity by violating social/professional norms, but ALSO sexually harasses people in violation of the law, how in the world are his consequences the fault of a newspaper article?
You say, "this is not the place to debate the degree of his culpability," but how can you, or your friend, separate what he did from what happened to him? The consequences flow from his bad acts, not from the acts being reported. The buck stops with the sexual harasser. And, good thing for the press! Sunlight is the best disinfectant. I wouldn't want my daughter or any other girl to be taught by harassing pervs whose acts were swept under the rug.
1
Your assumption is that all accusations represent the whole truth. Some, as in the case of my friend, are 25 years old. I’m still trying to figure what kind of threat Chuck Close, a quadriplegic, presents that results in the cancellation of a show at the National Gallery. He said something “inappropriate.” This is not some monster like Harvey Weinstein. Tom Brokaw is going through the same thing, An accusation from years ago — against a letter signed by 65 women who find him to be an exemplary colleague. Social-media pile-ons bring out the worst in some people. Just check out any unmoderated comment thread. Daphne Merkin stuck her neck out on this. There’s a kind of Jacobin ferocity at the moment that believes every « j’accuse” that is is uttered. I think Al Franken got a rotten deal, for example. My point is that a newspaper is not judge and jury and jailer. Réflexive condemnation bothers me.
Trying to prevent people from working and living decently would be the worst possible legacy of this period.
6
Many of these guys seem to not even accept that what they did was wrong, so why don’t we start there with some sort of mandated therapy. Many men seem to have the perspective of a 12 year old, so we need to re-educate (educate) them on how relate to women. No one is safe as long as they persist in their entitled view of the world. They are bullies who never learned to be ashamed of their worst behaviors.
8
Why is it that men being deprived of making a living is a huge part of the equation when that consideration has never been extended to the countless women who had to endure harassment or lost their jobs when they didn’t play along?
The fact is, for any of these “fallen men” plotting a comeback, just stop. You clearly haven’t begun to grasp what your actions have done to others nor have you achieved the amount of self-reflection needed to make fundamental changes to your thought and behavior patterns. Look at Ryan Lizza - that guy is dating a 25 year old reporter! Getting named on the SMML and being fired from The New Yorker for sexual misconduct clearly hasn’t resonated with him on any meaningful level. The again, maybe some of these men truly believe they’re entitled to the entitlements male privilege brings them.
7
"What Ms. Elva and Mr. Stranger engaged in was, in its own way, a warped form of restorative justice, a model developed by indigenous communities and embraced by groups who mistrust the criminal justice system."
-------
That a limited description of restorative justice.
It is also supported by people who see it as the practical embodiment of Jesus' teaching to forgive those who wrong you, even 70 x 7 times, as well as by people (religious or not) who find that punishment of the offender doesn't bring them, the victims, the closure that they thought they might achieve via criminal punishment.
Those are completely separate from trusting the court system.
4
According to the reporting I have seen, Mr Rose's misconduct was with staff of his privately owned show aired on Bloomberg and PBS- not CBS News. Knowing this, why did you refer to him only as a CBS Anchor? While true, it implies his misconduct happened at West 57th.
7
Every one of them needs to experience complete financial ruin, eternal social isolation and removal of their products/performances/images from the public sphere. At a minimum. Animals like Weinstein new to also find themselves incarcerated for up to life. But with stakes that high, we need to ensure that our wrath isn’t used to promote homophobia, as in the absurd persecution of Kevin Spacey.
2
"Every one of them needs to experience complete financial ruin, eternal social isolation and removal of their products/performances/images from the public sphere. At a minimum." At a minimum? You seem to offer the best recipe for the creation of domestic terrorists that will target women. Because, in their condition of utter despair, such men will have no other hope but to revenge.
This is a thoughtful column. I have been struck by how many of those urging permanent banishment for these offenders take a far more lenient approach towards accused and even convicted criminals.
It is also unjust to suggest verbal harassers be treated as harshly as serial physical assaulters, who I think should be not only shunned, but tried for possible imprisonment.
I doubt, however, that many victims of rape want to ever see their predator again, much less participate in a prolonged "restorative" process with him.
4
I find it hard to accept Ms. Baker’s premise. Accountability for their actions has come late in the lives of a number of these men, such as Bill Cosby. It’s hard to mount a “comeback” at 80 from such a devastating reversal.
Then, there’s the question, “what do we do with them?” Well, where crimes were committed we will indict and try them and, where the evidence is compelling, we will convict and jail them. Those individuals will serve time – I suspect, eventually, that Harvey Weinstein will be among them; and it’s quite possible that Weinstein could be 80 before HE’S officially paid his debts to society. Others will be sued for large parts of their fortunes and be forced to pay them – they will be Green Kryptonite to society for years, and will see vastly diminished resources. Hard to stage a comeback when your resources are so diminished and you’re a pariah to boot.
There’s always the example of Richard Nixon who, after putting us through what he did came back with many books (I’ve read them all, they’re superb and they were highly influential on public policy thinkers), as well as highly influential private advice given (he never took a dime for it) to multiple presidents and many other leaders. He never really made a “comeback”, but there were enough who regarded him as redeemed that President Bill Clinton was moved to give him a laudatory eulogy at his burial.
2
But truly “redeemed or not”, Richard Nixon is the very rare exception: I don’t believe that Harvey Weinstein has the intellectual capacity or grit that Richard Nixon had, or that he is capable of that kind of sustained contribution over many years.
Then, we need to take into account the relative severity of their transgressions. Objectively, Matt Lauer and Charlie Rose were not Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby, and Al Franken isn’t in the same league by galaxies. As Ms. Baker points out, there are and will be many men whose careers don’t compel intense scrutiny. For those whose failures weren’t so crippling, why NOT give them a chance to redeem themselves after SOME punishment (criminal, financial, professional, all of the above) is exacted? For society to fail to do so suggests a lifetime shunning that many would find unacceptable for less than pathological crimes. In the end, redemption is not automatic and requires effort on the parts of the outed and condemned – and Charlie Rose’s choice of the form his redemption takes is up to society to judge, not Ms. Baker.
Finally, we need to distinguish between those who made choices that represent a failure of character and those who demonstrate a pathology. If their transgressions were pathological, we owe it to society to keep a close eye on these individuals, to minimize the chances that they will prey again.
5
As a survivor of sexual abuse, I have to live with the consequences for the rest of my life. There's no "come back" for me. Maybe these men could take some time to reflect on the impact of their actions, demonstrate actual empathy for their victims, and devote their time, energy and money toward organizations that provide legal and emotional support to sexual abuse and assault survivors.
284
I think part of the problem is that these guys are incapable of empathy - at least with the opposite sex. Isn't that the definition of a sociopath?
17
We will have to go after the money that might support their programs.
8
Rehabilitation seems to be the option. Everyone deserves the chance to make up for their crimes. That's one reason we have a justice system.
The bottom line is, these men don't disappear. Sweeping them under the rug is an injustice to our fellow citizens and fellow victims. The men may have perpetrated their crime on us, but allowing them to wander around unrehabilitated only allows them to make someone else a victim. That's the true justice - we make sure that they don't perpetrate their crime again on someone else.
So what does rehabilitation for these men look like?
1
It's really not up to the writer or any "us" to determine what someone else's life looks like, though that's what Baker says at the end. Charlie Rose and all the rest can do with their lives what they will, and the public can respond as it will. If Rose wants to attempt some series of #MeToo interviews, he's free to do that--and Baker and others are free to heap scorn on him. I'd be happy to join in.
2
I thought consequence was the entire point behind punitive action. There is a penalty when you do something wrong. Even a mistake or minor infraction can result in a felony depending on your luck. If you need to think you might be doing something wrong, stop what you're doing. I was taught to never put myself in a situation where a felony was even possible. A felony can ruin your life. That was the message. They had a very good point too. There are too many examples to name.
I understand rape, particularly campus rape, is difficult to address legally. Both campuses and law need to find better ways to address the nuance of sexual encounters. Punishment cannot be perceived as arbitrary or perpetrators are bound to feel resentment. Not every incident is immediately a felony. However, the original principle stands. If you knew what you did might ruin your life and even someone else's life, why'd you do it?
There's not a lot room for sympathy in these situations. A guilty party can express remorse. More often, they claim the role of victim. I have no desire to encourage this behavior. We should use their life's failure as a warning to educate young men and women. This is what happens when you do bad things.
6
The famous will sit with Oprah or give a soul-baring interview with a (female) interviewer of similar stature and some level of rehabilitation will begin. For the less famous, the road will be trickier. For both, it should start with understanding the motivation; the boss who gropes his female employee is not normal. Why do some men need that feeling of power and control others don't? Or do they all have the need but some don't act on it?
Forgiveness can only be given if there is admission that these acts are wrong accompanied by a true commitment to change. What we more often hear is rationalizing; the "my actions were misinterpreted" defense, which does not address the behavior. When given the opportunity they will transgress again.
2
The problem here isn't what society should do, it is what the marketplace will offer men like Charlie Rose. Lots of men have made money from their bad-boy notoriety -- look at Trump.
197
As Seth Myers said last night about Charlie Rose "JUST, NO!"
6
Cosby had a trial and was convicted. In that trial he had presumption of innocence. The prosecutor had to prove his quilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The other men mentioned in this piece simply lost their positions because of allegations. This is a big difference.
If the men confessed to the charges and asked for forgiveness, they would be admitting guilt. They would be doing the prosecutor’s work for them. It would be foolish for any man to do that. Therefore, the programs of restorative justice which begin with confession and repentance simply cannot work.
I suspect someone like Charley Rose knows all this and is planning to get public opinion on his side. In the long run, I think he will succeed. I would bet money on it.
3
Not all punishments involve criminal conviction and incarceration. There's an entire spectrum of repercussions that perpetrators of rape and sexual assault could face (and usually don't): as the punishments are less severe, the necessary standard of proof is correspondingly less strict.
Not all confessions are admissible in court, and not all admissible confessions are convincing to juries. Suppose an otherwise-credible suspect, someone the jury believes is innocent before they hear about the confession, says on cross-examination, "Of course I went to the reconciliation session and said I did it: my boss was really convinced I'd assaulted Ms. Smith, so I'd have been fired if I didn't confess. I don't like lying, but I couldn't afford to lose that job. And really, what mattered is how well Ms. Smith could recover from her trauma, and what kind of culture we have at CorpCo, not whether that was my hand or Bob's that Ms. Smith felt." I don't think that would hurt their case much if at all. And if the boss and Ms. Smith were satisfied with the outcome, it would make the case that much less likely to be prosecuted at all.
1
It is specifically because we have no consistent, legal response to sexual crimes committed by men against women that we must then discuss “Well, what DO we do with these men now? Whose problem are they, and whose problem will they be in the future?” Clearly the answer right now is a version of kicking the can down the road.
We have innumerable legal responses to everything from shop-lifting to murder: fines, community service, parole, jail. But rarely do men guilty of these assaults suffer much if anything at all in the way of consequences, and when they do, it sounds an awful lot like what their victims suffer. Loss of jobs, loss of future opportunities, loss of social respect. And perhaps most consequentially, profound loss of one’s own sense of self.
When the countless victims of sexual abuse and violence experience those lost wages, opportunities, social standing, sense of self, their suffering is little more than random background noise, so ubiquitous that we have long ago learned to ignore it. But when it comes to the perpetrators, our society maintains a lingering hangover of sympathy for them.
That is the real problem.
8
How many comebacks are they entitled to, if the first one doesn't work out?
I don't know the answer to your thoughtful questions, but I do not have any interest in any project the well-known guys come up with. Shunning isn't inappropriate and seems to be the only option.
These guys have no shame. Their actions were beyond the pale. Some of them are wealthy. Who cares what becomes of them?
16
We don't only need to think about how to handle these transgressors today but also to consider how they became transgressors in the first place. This is key! It is simple to say that powerful men (in this case) treated many women (and others without power) badly and criminally because of our unjust social system and skewed power dynamic. However, this is too easy an explanation. Many people in power do not abuse and hurt others. These men are lacking a sense of responsibility and compassion for others and act out on other people they perceive as weak. All people, and parents in general, need to learn to raise children in compassion homes, with understanding for their boundaries, physical and mental, so that we don't raise more generations of abusers and victims.
11
Embedded within the question, and exemplified by the Elva/Stranger example is the problem of time -- will we give time to reaching a restorative resolution? Katie Baker has given time, lots of it, to the question, which is why she is so lucid about it and tentative steps toward answer. But our tendencies to bury trouble and always try to "move on" keep us arriving in some unsatisfactory future and ignoring the present.
And, of course, it doesn't help to have exhibit A living in the White House.
8
Redemption should require first an admission of culpability, followed by a willingness to accept consequences and a sincere effort remediate behaviour. It may be a long process - but it is necessary for the victims, society, and yes,the perpetrators.
Those who refuse earn their exile. Those who accept and engage in the process deserve consideration for a normal life, likely with some restrictions.
To err is human. So is accepting responsibility.
7
Is anyone else horrified to learn that a television station, obviously for the sensationalism and money, is willing to give Charlie Rose television time to exploit and excuse what he and others have done?
There does need to be a deterrent to this behavior. Depending on the severity of the act, there should be a felony or misdemeanor conviction that is put in a database that is available to the public. This could be both a deterrent to offenders and a warning to others.
19
There needs to be a felony conviction without proving men like C. Rose guilty beyond reasonable doubt? So a simple accusation should result in him being incarcerated and possibly beaten/murdered by inmates (or alternatively, put into solitary confinement for years on end) as a sex offender?
If one convicted of a misdemeanor, he/she won't be put in prison. If he/she is found guilty of a felony, then yes, he/she belongs in prison.
Society has lost the ability to forgive and forget, which is essential to moving on. I use the word society, not victims, because the victims themselves cannot be expected to forgive or forget. Nonetheless, we cannot make criminals radioactive for life. We need to return to the concept that once someone is punished he has paid his debt to society and is entitled to a fresh start.
7
You're confusing crimes for which the legal system consistently responds and for which there are consistent consequences. Then society is 'repaid' and a victim may feel closure (and choose forgiveness).
Men who repeatedly commit sexual violence against women rarely suffer any consequences, and when they do the consequences are hardly consistent. How is society repaid for this harm, and who do future victims forgive?
6
The original phrase is "forgive not forget."
One suspects males are the ones to edit it down to "forgive and forget". I prefer the original, if not "forgive only in some cases but always remember their names".
1
Wrong. Forgive and forget had been in use at least 500 years and is said to be derived from the new testament.
These men committed crimes. They weren't misguided or misinformed or stepping over what they perceived as unclear boundaries. If they had systematically stolen from their jobs they would pay the cost, which would be jail time and yes, difficulty getting another job and being accepted by their community. They would not be trusted in those positions again. What these men and many other men took from the women they preyed upon has lasting repercussions on that women's life, relationships and future jobs. Forgiveness is one thing, but these men forfeited their rights when they raped, groped, or otherwise assaulted women. In my view, they are getting off very easy. As a survivor of rape, assault, and so much harassment at every job I've worked at, and as someone who has paid thousands in counseling just to be able to work in my profession and continue on in my life, what these men are paying in return is a small price.
158
Allegedly committed crimes. What's with you people? Take them to court and not trial by media. What part of "Alleged" don't you understand?
4
Well said, Maureen. I am a domestic violence survivor, the abuser murdered two others after serially abusing and terrifying many women including me. His victims' families and his survivors are permanently scarred and damaged. He continues with his millions of dollars in capital appeals in an open-shut case in a state that cannot afford healthcare for all of their decent citizens.
The American criminal justice system needs to be seriously overhauled: egregiously expensive, bloated, inefficient, racist, corrupt, and patriarchal. Proven violent criminals do not need capital or non-capital appeals! Incarcerate them without parole and protect society. Non-violent criminals should be ordered restitution and rehabilitation.
3
"These men committed crimes."
Crimes they learned in school, at church, from their parents, from their culture.
Let's address the elephant in the room: these things happen and are swept under the rug because the majority of American men have no respect for women and a substantial plurality of American women likewise disparage their own gender.
2
Thank you for this well thought out essay. It really raises questions that have not really been addressed. There is no one answer to this question that fits all - yes Charlie Rose should be donating to women shelters or rape programs because he has the money to do so. College students should have some form of re education, not just be shunned or passed off to another institution. And while I would not miss seeing Charlie Rose again, I do lament never seeing another performance by Kevin Spacey. Perhaps when it comes to the not famous students, professors and employees it would be more desirable to keep them in place where they are a known quantity and can be monitored and required to attend programs or treatments designed to modify their attitudes and behaviors. Better than letting them go someplace new to continue with their abusive ways.
8
Thank you, Katie Baker, for asking the important question in this debate. Sure, we can quickly label someone a predator and then expel them from school or the workplace but that expulsion does nothing to build emotional intelligence about sexual encounters. Instead, we have created a class of young men who rightly wonder if their next step should be self-destruction.
Outside the United States, schools and states have been using restorative justice to reintegrate these so-called "bad men" back into the community. Victims are given the space to describe the harms they endured and to consider possible solutions in order to move forward. Respondents are given an opportunity to think through how their actions harmed themselves. The premise of restorative justice is that people can learn through their mistakes.
Unfortunately, in the United States, we have been seduced by the Gods of Punishment. Not only are we content to put more money into prisons than into education, we are also comfortable with the idea of a disposable class of citizens. For people on the left, who have become skeptical of the need for a War on Drugs, it would be prudent to ask the same questions of the War on Predators. Do we really think that we can arrest or fire ourselves out of this problem?
70
labeling a person a predator them being a predator are two different things. Like a "Scarlet Letter". Time to prove alllegations and not just finding them guilty because they were accused.
3
Reactions to high publicity male misconduct have been about emotionally striking out, without much real thought about the appropriate cosequences. Depriving a man of the ability to make a living for himself and his family--which seems to be step one in most of these cases--is extremely harsh. Should every act of harassment be handled in this way?
It seems that the public disclosure, with its attendant embarrassment, coupled with some form of education or sensitivity training would suffice for many non-physically aggressive cases.
Of course it is an employer's responsibility to assure a safe work environment, but banishment may not be necessary in more minor forms of misconduct. Physical assault is a criminal justice issue; if it did not involve the work place or other employees, it is difficult to see why an employer should be administering punishment.
I agree with Ms. Baker: much thought needs to go into these questions and not just an angry striking out.
8
Simply telling others what someone has done is not a punishment; it is honesty. Education is not a punishment. I agree that we need to have a path for men (and women, in some cases) to come back into society, but what you are suggesting is not even a slap on the wrist.
19
Agreed. Give them an inch and they'll take a mile.
I would say to Katie Baker that it is not "up to [abused women] to determine what it looks like when" their abusers somehow stumble back into mainstream life and work. It is up to men to do that.
How that happens is a mystery, but clearly non-abusing men have a major role to play in establishing the structures to promote brotherly redemption, and to acting as leaders, coaches and role models for the abusers to redeem themselves.
Any attempt at redemption that fails to focus on the abuser himself as the primary change agent will remain superficial, leaving the abuser fundamentally unchanged. His behavior might improve for the short-term but for the long-term it will inevitably slide back to the original standard.
Unless they persist in their damaging behavior, abusive men should not be condemned to a lifetime of social and economic isolation. But if society expects their victims to fix them, these men will remain broken and dangerous forever.
11
I think Ms. Baker acknowledged that it's not the victim's duty to fix the abuser. Perhaps she did not elaborate enough, but to me, it came across that this is an issue that society needs to deal with. As in, the rest of us. All of us. In my thoughts on this, the victim should have all the support and safety society can provide, for as long as she needs. Separate from the victim, the abuser also needs society's support for rehabilitation. The dangerous ones should be locked away and find their rehabilitation away from society. But those with less dangerous charges can and should work out their broken selves while still living modestly productive lives within society. You are absolutely right that the onus for change must come from the abuser. Rehabilitation is not a given, but it must be attempted. Those who fail may just find themselves joining their more dangerous brethren in jail.
I think Ms. Baker makes an important point with this article. The #MeToo abusers are just one example of a serious failing in our justice system: once a crime has been "paid for," what happens to the criminal?
2
Have we forgotten the concept of rehabilitation? It really doesn't pain me to say that these men need help. Redemption puts all the responsibility on them. We need to help them see the harm they have caused and replace the moral framework that allowed them to do it with a sense of responsibility and support for all their fellow human beings. You see this kind of thing in the Norwegian justice system, and it works in the vast majority of cases. Punishment and retribution are ineffective in dealing with children which is really what these people are. What about the cases where rehabilitation fails? That is another topic, but it is the small minority in my experience.
55
Exactly! the core issue with so many of the non-criminal harassers is cultural. They have been raised or acculturated to believe and act as if women are truly inferior and there to be objects of sexual attention, innuendo, etc. The whistles and wolf calls, the touching, leering, commenting from men in general is the issue. They need to "get it" that that behavior is outside societal norms. Some of them truly change and should be given that opportunity.
Rape and assault are criminal offenses and should be prosecuted as such. The Charlie Rose type of exhibitionism is big ego, lousy moral framework, more ego, and a disgusting attitude that his (old!) nude body would be a treat to see for young assistants. I am old so I can say that.
6
You can simultaneously want someone punished and their victims safe -- and not want them punished "forever." To me, what I'd like is a sort of open database on people -- so that if someone harassed women and is transferred to a new job, where they then harass someone new -- the new victim can report them to the database and find out whether they already have a long history of this -- and that can influence her decision about how to pursue the issue (with a friendly chat or a criminal charge.)
In other words, I'm willing to open the door to people improving their behavior if we can also keep open the door to them being increasingly accountable if they don't.
60
You say you don't want them punished "forever" - but then you want an open database where someone can probe your work complaint history at will. I think such a database (e.g., the [expletive] Media Men List) has good intentions, but would be ripe for abuse and exploitation and would likely lead precisely to people being punished forever.
5
The whole issue with the Media Men List (which I thought was absolutely brilliant) was that women had to make a list like that because no database existed.
For decades, a powerful man could abuse a woman, and she wouldn't say anything because 1) she thought no one would believe her (and they'd accuse her of wanting his money), and 2) she didn't know she was the 30th woman he did that to. Women often have strength only in numbers when it comes to addressing a sexual harasser. It was only through sheer numbers that Cosby was finally convicted.
My idea involves a private list -- not a public one -- that would only be accessed by people reporting an issue. I think if a man groped me, it would be helpful to me to know whether I was his first victim or his 50th in choosing whether I wanted to file charges (and knowing how strong my case would be). It would be helpful to know if he had already gone through multiple sexual harassment trainings (and ignored them) in choosing my response, too.
Men may deserve a second change. They don't deserve a 30th or 40th chance. In that case, they are indicating that they don't want to learn. And prison is the best option.
For equity, there would need to be an open database for every employee in America, of every gender, for any work complaint history. So anytime anyone is working with someone else and the other person makes them feel uncomfortable, anyone can look it up. Including hiring people and human resources departments. It may not always be sexual but there are people of both genders who have made co-workers feel uncomfortable or who have acted in less than professional ways.
2
As an old second wave feminist, I don't believe we're addressed the underlying issue: patriarchy. Yes, individuals, some of them at least, can reconcile, and I hope they will. But in the long run we're not going to address this issue until females have parity—in the family, in education, in the workplace.
I'm heterosexual, and not even now numb to attractive men, but I'm very wary of the implications of that attraction in our society. It's when that attraction is attached to power that the weaker party is in danger.
We have to teach our sons to respect women and quit waiting to become idols. And we have to teach our daughters to respect themselves even when attracted to dominant males. I often wonder who Hillary Clinton might have been had she not gone off to Arkansas to marry Bill. And what might all those women whom Cosby attacked have become if they'd had powerful women as role models?
Until women have parity in our institutions, we can rehabilitate only the men who understand their transgressions. I hate that Al Franken got thrown under the bus, but like so many women, he's collateral damage until we solve the larger problem.
272
I like Franken, but he was wrong, and his excuse was comedy! That woman was sleeping when he grabbed her breasts in jest! Not funny. There's a similarity between this victim of his and Cosby's -- lack of consent. You can't consent when you are asleep!
6
I agree, Desert Dogood. It will happen this time as long as people like you and me join the young generation in speaking out and taking action against institutionalized patriarchy.
The good news is that men who have taken their "betterness" for granted - like my son - are starting to understand that this behavior is not okay. They have daughters who will face the same discrimination women have for centuries unless they wake up and join Socially Conscious women and men to demand change.
Refuse to attend religious rituals that foster the "men are better" idea. Refuse to vote for any man or woman who thinks they have a right to dictate how women and minority populations live.
The times they are a-changing. Women are stepping up to take one-half the power in America and around the world to bring balance to it. NOW is the time.
13
Franken didn't get thrown under a bus, he groped women without their consent.
6
"an unprecedented number of powerful men are facing significant consequences"
Both parts of that are true, and hear them both. Yeah, they've been nailed with consequences. However, these were and remain "powerful men."
What is a powerful man? He is not someone who is defeated, quits, and goes away after one reverse, not even after a big one.
They'll be back. Not only that, they'll want to get their revenge. They'll come back like the Terminator's pickup truck through the front door, if they possibly can.
And just who is going to stop them? Really.
It is not just what to do with them, as in the title. It is what to do when they come for you. They will.
The battle is not over. This was just phase one.
Don't misunderstand that I want them to do a comeback, or want them to succeed in this. I'm just saying its coming, don't get all overconfident.
31
Thanks for the warning...I think you are right.
3
Compared to what their victims faced, I believe these men are facing "insignificant" consequences. In addition. It's not like any of these men are penniless. As much as I previously may have enjoyed Charlie Roses' interviews, I have no need to see anymore of them.
None of these guys are irreplaceable.
8
Good thoughts here, with important awareness of the nuanced complexity involved in creating genuine change and safety. In my work as a psychotherapist w people who seek change, this tends to be a long and careful process.
However, few of the men in the public eye present indications they are remorseful, nor do they express interest in learning about the origins of their impulses that have formed into patterns of sexually abusive behavior. Sadly I find this also true of sexual aggressors in everyday work and home life relationships.
It seems we are on the cusp of change where women’s (and men’s) rights to interpersonal safety are becoming more widely and publicly accepted, at least by most men and now especially most women.
I will call upon MLK jrs words (even tho he too was flawed in this area of human respect and dignity, it would be interesting, were he living today, to know how he may or may not contribute to this exchange.)
“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.”
I hope and pray that all people of good heart and mind remain silent no more! That we remain vocal, and active in rising to the challenge of creating healthier relations where misuse of power and sexual aggression exists.
45
I was mistaken too and thought it was asking for name and email because of the "Email me" right under the second field. I was about to enter my email and was sure that the Location field had previously said email.
There is an old term that really ought to be renewed: Consciousness Raising. What if predators go to classes, set up a bit like AA, in which they learn that women are not subhuman life forms and prey? It would be like court-ordered rehab combined with "How to be a Gentleman" classes. Said class would cost them money, which would go to pay the therapist as well as shelters and age-appropriate K-16 Consciousness Raising classes, and every time they back-slid, it's "back to class" they would go.
99
More than a few of these men need to be sharing a cell with Bill Cosby.
4
It is a measure of just how threatened women feel that they are already organizing countermeasures to what has not yet happened.
9
You have not read this article carefully. It HAS happened. Many examples were cited. It is unfortunately very real.
How long a “vacation” did the serial abuser O’Reilly take from Fox News before his triumphant return to a $100 million contract? I don’t believe for a moment that his abusive days are over.
Corporations and media conglomerates merely give the appearance of taking these abusive men seriously in order to appease advertisers till the smoke clears. Then they invite them back at the first opportunity.
Women and men have a lot of work to do.
5
How threatened they are or how angry they are?
4
Yeah, I wouldn't say threatened. I would say tired, jaded, and fed up.
6
I can honestly say that I hadn't considered these questions before. And that was a mistake. I've been listening to voices that say there's no punishment that's too much punishment, and I am going to stop.
Yes, like most everyone, I want to punitive -- but the repercussions of doing so outside of the legal system are messy, to put it lightly, and can go awry in terrible, terrible ways. I want there to be easy answers. I know now there are none.
23
In terms of learning theory, punishment is either negative (absence or withdrawal of reward) or positive (infliction of aversive consequences.) Every one of these men have been rewarded more than punished for their offensive behavior - by parents, teachers, bosses, etc. Rewards increase the likelihood that the behavior will persist. Outside the legal system, we all distribute rewards and punishments constantly. We need to do it more mindfully, with awareness of what behavior we want to encourage or extinguish - and awareness that we reinforce the behavior of others around us all the time. This is our power, if we will take it seriously and use it responsibly. If enough of us do this, there will be an attrition of cases for the legal system to deal with.
3
There is no fully satisfying response to sexual harassment or assault: In some instances expulsion from school, loss of employment, or similar punishments help a little. For the severe examples (although every situation is severe for the person involved) jail may be relevant.
Part of the problem is the puzzle posed when someone who offers valued skills or talents (musician, teacher, artist, pastor) stops both their unacceptable and their highly valuable behaviors because of a “me too” event. Stopping the bad behavior is positive, but the loss to society may be quite unfortunate.
Finding a suitable, proportionate, and satisfactory remedy/rehab strategy/punishment for a perpetrator gets difficult quickly. Some punishments will not be severe enough to comfort the “victim”. Others will cause widespread and not always positive ripple effects. It is also not clear which perpetrators can get over the propensity to repeat offenses.
Expulsion, loss of current employment and other local “dismissals” simply move the problem away from “here”. Managing these problems where they occur with both treatment,punishments and monitoring might be helpful, although hard on someone who sees their rapist or harasser on campus,at work, or in the neighborhood. However in the long run there might be therapeutic benefit in both directions.
11
Yeah, I wouldn't say threatened. I would say tired, jaded, and fed up.
3
Why call a collaborative effort to get at the truth and make amends a "warped" form of restorative justice? There is no clear, straight path to restorative justice. It has to be "irregular" and truth-seeking and determined to be real (and to work). There has to be grace involved. Isn't restorative justice what we all want?
35
Restorative justice is probably valuable, yes. But at this point, there are too many amends to be made. We need to get to the root of how society enables this behavior and why such a high proportion of men feels entitled to assault and harass.
Deterrents are necessary, as is the upheaval of societal norms relating to gender.
21
One of the reasons it’s warped is because victims of the crime can have a huge burden placed on them in this kind of system - not every victim is going to be ok with having a sitdown with a perpetrator in front of the other community stakeholders.
Another reason is that arbitrators or facilitators in this kinda of system are often not neutral (they’re not like what judges in the legal system aspire to be, for example). This can also be problematic.
I think the use of the word ‘warped’ here is to acknowledge some of these problems with the restorative justice system while still conceding that a restorative justice system may be the best model for thinking through and resolving these conflicts.
9
So well written......it begs the question of whether or not this conundrum applies to all forms of crime which directly and negatively impact another human being.
A path of restorative justice would be the place to spend our energies, even if it is fraught with individual details, assumptions about human behavior and uneven results. All crimes against others should have, as a natural consequence, some measure of direct compensation (not material) to the victim. And not just for abusers of women......
35
Well, I'll speak up for the side of forgiveness. It saddens me to think that some people's approach to this problem is to show their disapproval of an action by permanently ostracizing the person who did it.
Of course, real forgiveness requires the transgressor to truly desire it and to ask for it. But no one is likely to do that if they feel that no one will listen, let alone grant it.
105
These fellow who are in the public eye, though, seem disinclined to desire forgiveness because they are used to being powerful, don't they? I don't see with most of them any comprehension that they've done something wrong.
31
Spoken like a man.
First, forgiving is for the women who were personally harmed.
Second, forgiveness should not entail letting these predators erase the past (or make hay from it) and regain their former lives.
42
Well, Rob. How would you feel if the tables were turned and you were raped or otherwise sexually assaulted? Do you think women in that situation are able to "wish away" the long term damage to their lives directly resulting from these men's behavior?
You do realize for many the result of this kind of sexual predation is depression, suicide, substance abuse, difficulty with interpersonal relationships? These are expensive, life altering conditions to treat.
It's hard for you to imagine, isn't it? Who is helping these individuals get their lives back together?
We've tolerated and enabled men's behavior for far too long.
30
If there are laws on the books, then they should be followed
and especially enforced with the proper sentencing - just like the ways we lock up people for minor drug offenses and the like.
Having said that, if these individuals cannot be brought to justice ( the ''crimes'' not being able to be proven in a court of law ), then the question reverts to innocent until proven guilty. That is what our justice system is based upon and should apply to all. Correct ?
As far as appearances go, then the public has a right as a free society to not consume, purchase or partake in anything that any one individual ( that has been accused but not convicted of anything ) might want to be selling or offering.
That is how the system is supposed to work.
65
Good (poor) example. Minor drug offense, a victimless crime. Said perpetrator should be locked up and have a record follow them the rest of their lives. No student loans. No security clearances. Branded and ostracized from society cause they got caught doing something everyone else (many) has done.
The devastation of the immoral drug wars is something we are still suffering from. Generations of families ruined cause of politics, self righteousness, and hysteria morality.
Nice example.
Did you mean to use it as such?
Scary parable.
2
I agree with you, Dobby's sock. As a survivor of a violent abuser who went on to murder two women with an aggravated murder sentencing and plenty of testimony from former spouses and girlfriends, those who need to be locked up are those who threaten harm to society, who are proven violent criminals.
The U.S. War On Drugs is abysmal and has ruined many decent lives over minor transgressions.
The U.S. has it upside down, criminal justice system here needs to be completely overhauled.
@DS
I was being facetious and sarcastic about the sentencing. ( for the record )
Redemptive behavior certainly occurs among our species. It's not rare but I don't believe it is the norm over the long-term. Falling back to old habits, to varying degrees, pretty much defines us. And I don't think any amount of societal re-education will alter that. That isn't to excuse men behaving very, very badly toward others (nor many women doing the same by the way). It's simply to recognize that the problem of power over others, and its use to take advantage, has always and will always be with us, and is particularly enhanced in the hyper-competitive, consumer/market-driven economy that today defines our world.
8
If the men staged a "comeback" by volunteering full time for victims of abuse, I would say go for it. I suggest four months of self-imposed charity work for every victim each man abused. Clean dishes at a soup kitchen, wash clothes at a homeless shelter, visit nursing homes to sit and talk with residents, answer phones at one of the thousands of charities that help victims. Be humble, be giving, be good. That sort of comeback would impress me. Anything else demonstrates the insincerity of the apology.
258
Agreed!
the Restorative Justice systems I hear of require action on the part of the wrong-doer. One obvious example; a young man burned down a family home. He had to take part in rebuilding it. A teaching moment.
If the State finds someone guilty of a crime and the punishment is a fine, for example, that fine should go to the victim, not the state.
38
Ya, volunteer work sounds good. But restorative justice is not made of placing known sex abusers with homeless people and nursing home residents. People who have committed sexual violence, "talking with" vulnerable populations is not restorative, considering these abusers preyed on people over whom they thought they had a power advantage.
Ask instead, what do their victims think would be restorative? Anger management and treatment groups/programs, placing the perpetrators with other serious offenders in their re-entry capacity?- Let them see themselves and "help" themselves, for example.
1
There is no way to measure sincerity of purpose. There is also no test that would satisfy all.
The "MeToo" offenses are sometimes clearly criminal, but not always.
We need to be confident that offenders understand that they ARE offenders, what they did and why it is an offense, especially for non-criminal offenses.
I would much prefer proof that an offender had attended and participated actively in a program that taught what is offensive, what is borderline, and what is not offensive. (and just defining these is hard).
The only "confession" I value is non-offending future behavior. Any re-offense should be overwhelming evidence of insincerity, with a more aggressively enforced isolation or shaming.
Is someone causes an "at-fault" auto accident even if another is injured, they do not need to drive a car for the rest of their lives with a big "Dangerous Driver" flashing sign on it -- and be required to never exceed 20 mph. No, there is a process of "rehabilitation". Just so for MeToo offenses. This problem needs solving.
5
None of the men pictured have admitted wrongdoing. They are still blaming their victims or claiming a "misunderstanding" towards obviously inappropriate and demeaning behavior.
Even children know "I'm sorry I have to apologize," doesn't cut it. If someone refuses to admit their actions are wrong there is no redemption. There is no point.
What they're asking for is a pass. For everyone to forget about what happened. A collective "we" should not allow this to happen.
333
I think you are overlooking the remorseful statements of Louis C.K., as well as others who have been in the public eye. Let's be fair.
32
Louis C.K. admitted that what he did was wrong, and never denied doing it or that it was wrong. He didn't do a great job apologizing, but he did apologize.
If you are going to publicly judge people, fine, these guys deserve it. But don't slander them with inaccuracies.
33
Oh yes the C.K. - "I asked women in subordinate positions whose careers I could devastate whether it was okay" defense. Weird how he had no idea it was wrong, yet never approached women of similar status.
The only remorse they have is remorse for being caught. Not for the women who turned away from their industries, who felt defeated and alienated. They are remorseful they can't treat women like objects on a buffet.
1
"More and more students and faculty, it appeared, were being removed from school grounds, but no one was proposing solutions, at least not publicly, for where they should go."
Frankly, why should anyone propose solutions for where these men should go? Is that something to which they are entitled because of their former celebrity status? Even if, in the case of the aforementioned students and faculty, the source of their celebrity itself was their reprehensible behavior. I know somewhere they can go, in a hand basket.
Perhaps they can explore new lines of work that don't involve being showered with privilege in the public eye. Maybe they can learn to live like the rest of us plebes? I see lots of signs in my neighborhood looking for people to bus tables and deliver food. I'm sure they could learn how to do those jobs.
What should we do? Continue to ostracize these men. Not that they ever deserved our attention, but they certainly don't, now.
I won't waste another breath on these men. Next.
180
Just because their actions were reprehensible does not mean society--not you as an individual--can wash its hands of them. They are our criminals.
10
Agreed, I do understand that. But the author seems to be questioning what's next for the particular, high profile offenders. Isn't offering them new, high visibility digs just feeding their egos and inflated self importance and ultimately reinforcing their behavior?
There are court-mandated public treatment programs for sexual offenders, as I learned when I insisted a perpetrator of sexual assault on the NYC subway was arrested in 2010. The police officer was ready to just give him a ticket and let him go. I followed up and the defendant was assigned to a treatment program.
What it takes to ensure these men, who will not seek rehabilitation voluntarily, receive treatment is more noise on the part of those who have been assaulted and harassed in the form of pressing charges and holding men accountable. That can unlock doors to treatment for offenders. I would hope that the more often this happens, the more we'll put money into researching effective treatment methods and expanding treatment options for offenders.
Offenders won't get a chance at rehabilitation (if that is shown to truly be effective) until they are held accountable by those targeted with their reprehensible behavior. Our hesitation to be noisy and our inclination to coddle men is simply exacerbating the problem.
Brilliant response--thank you.
6