
Reckoning on Sexual Misconduct Divides Women Over How Harsh Judgment Must Be - artsandsci
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/05/business/sexual-harassment-debates.html
======
mikeash
Does anyone else find it strange that we've apparently settled on "sexual
misconduct" as the general descriptor for this stuff? Is the media afraid to
call it "sex crime"?

~~~
AnimalMuppet
Does every wolf whistle and catcall deserve jail time?

Does hitting on someone deserve jail time?

Does hitting on someone _aggressively_ deserve jail time?

Does hitting on someone aggressively _when you have a position of some power
relative to them_ deserve jail time?

Does doing it _repeatedly_ deserve jail time?

I am _not_ saying that we should be desensitized to this stuff. We should
_not_ become complacent and say it's OK. But it's not all in the category of
"crime". Reserve the word for the stuff that really is criminal, that is,
something that can land people in jail. (Calling _everything_ criminal winds
up desensitizing people to that which actually is criminal. "Oh, yeah, you say
that about everything, so this is probably no big deal too.")

~~~
mikeash
How much of that stuff is in the news? All of the sexual misconduct stories on
the first page of Google News right now, for example, are about things that
are clearly criminal.

This is _exactly_ why I'm disturbed that the standard term has become "sexual
misconduct." The major issues right now are people who use their power to rape
and assault. Using the term "sexual misconduct" in that context puts those
things in the same category as telling a naughty joke in the wrong company.
And instead of asking why we keep electing sex criminals, or why rapists seems
to enjoy so much success in Hollywood, we're asking whether or not a catcall
deserves jail time.

~~~
AnimalMuppet
I have no problem calling rapists "rapists" or "criminals".

But take Conyers, for example. I haven't been following that particular mess
closely, but a quick glance shows him being accused of (repeated) "unwanted
advances" and "mistreatment". Well, are unwanted advances abuse of a position
of power? Absolutely. Are they rape? Are they criminal? No and no. (I'm not
sure what, exactly, is covered by "mistreatment". Could that be criminal?
Certainly. Was it? I can't say without more specificity, and I don't care to
wade further into the cesspool to find out.)

~~~
mikeash
I haven't been following him closely either, but looking into it a bit more,
there's at least one alleged incident of sexual assault with him as well.

------
r0pchainer
So I think I understand and sympathize with the people who've come out about
sex crimes or sexual harassment. There are some very serious, truly
heartbreaking cases involving women who had to live in fear and had their
future relationships ruined because of these terrible acts.

But honestly, it's getting to the point where asking a woman out for coffee
seems like I might be harassing her.

I think there is a sexual dynamic that everyone avoids talking about, because
exploring it in such public light would be taboo. How do we distinguish
between what is primal, not yet understood when it comes to sexual dynamic
(body language, looks, etc...) prior to engaging in an intellectual
conversation, and the discomfort that women might feel when they are
approached by an entity they deem as harassing?

I don't mean to confuse creepy and harassing, but I expect to be forgiven if I
was 18, new to this world, and trying to get this to work without consciously
ignoring all of these warning messages about harassment. It just seems like
the solution is binary for the inexperienced. Either don't approach women, or
approach them _hard_. The latter may cause some issues.

I also don't want to take away from the truly heinous sex crimes that are
committed every day, but I think the lines need to be clearer for those of us
not so sharp or experienced.

