Sexual harassment accusations as a new McCarthyism? Discuss

[Houseoflego]

Not saying I totally think it is as these cultures totally do exist and need shifting. But given that it seems realistic that there is an attack on democracy happening at the mo I was wondering if anyone thinks there are similarities.

Its a heck of a way to take a politician or outspoken celeb down!

[JohnL]

Removing an actor from a film already filmed shocks me a bit (and not condoning anything Spacey did).

Could we eventually use tech to remove an actors entire repertoire - erasing them from history.

[Nigello]

That's possible, perhaps even likely. If hulking statues can be taken down, even destroyed because of a change in the way that person is viewed then the permanent erasing/archiving of celluloid and videotape is easily achieved.

[Houseoflego]

I'm really glad the Weinstein thing broke, it will do a lot of good in the long term and there is plenty of strong emerging evidence of illegal behaviour.

But removing someone from a film when there is absolutely no evidence is just not part of a modern democratic system of justice. Career's and reputations totally ruined on no evidence of anything illegal and often years ago when there was a very different culture!

Is that ok? On that basis I think almost anyone could be taken down if they spoke out against the wrong people.

Also not condoning anything Spacey did or did not do!

[DaveR]

The key point about McCarthyism was that almost everybody targeted was innocent of the key accusation i.e. that they were traitors. Most weren't Communist sympathisers at all, but even the cases involving those that were Communists did not show any evidence that they were working against the US.

My instinct (and it can only be that) is that the majority of the recent harassment allegations are sincere and are likely to contain a significant element of factual truth. However, that will capture an enormously wide scope of situations, from clumsy attempted flirting at one extreme all the way through to rape at the other extreme. In the short term the hope is that sensible debate remains possible, but even that may not be achievable - we live in immoderate times.

[keano77]

Am I right in thinking the film hasn't been released? If so hardly rewriting history on this point. More worrying to me is the rewriting of classic books (e.g. Noddy) to comply with modern norms rather than viewing them in historical context.

Anyway back on topic I think we need to keep a sense of perspective here. E.g., there's no need to strip Spacey of his many awards justly earned because of his sexual peccadilloes.

[JoeLeg]

I just want to clarify something. Are you saying that groping people, harassing them and aggressively trying to seduce them are all "peccadilloes". Because that infers something individual but ultimately harmless, whereas Spacey (and many others) seem to have been far more predatory, and I'm not sure the two are the same.

I haven't seen any account of stripping Spacey of his awards, though I suspect his career is over. I share concerns of over-reaction in general, but in the specific cases that have so far come to light it looks to me much more that the chickens are coming home to roost on certain powerful and sexually predatory men who shouldn't have done it in the first place.

[keano77]

Agree with your point on peccadilloes JoeLeg. I'll wait to see if many of the alleged transgressions are proved. My essential point is we can't have trial by twitter - a sort of virtual mob.

Some of the allegations may be well-founded and the people in question punished appropriately. I'm not sure in these cases people should be stripped of awards gained during their careers. It's not the same as, say, stripping athletes of medals won unfairly by drug enhanced cheating and re-writing sporting records accordingly.

[miga]

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The key point about McCarthyism was that almost

> everybody targeted was innocent of the key

> accusation i.e. that they were traitors. Most

> weren't Communist sympathisers at all, but even

> the cases involving those that were Communists did

> not show any evidence that they were working

> against the US.

>

> My instinct (and it can only be that) is that the

> majority of the recent harassment allegations are

> sincere and are likely to contain a significant

> element of factual truth. However, that will

> capture an enormously wide scope of situations,

> from clumsy attempted flirting at one extreme all

> the way through to rape at the other extreme. In

> the short term the hope is that sensible debate

> remains possible, but even that may not be

> achievable - we live in immoderate times.

This and the cycling post - striking gold.

This and McCarthyism are very little alike. Sexual harassment of any kind is illegal in the workplace, and has been for a long time. It's sad how much has been unsaid for so long.

[JohnL]

The Welsh First Minister speaking today (he was close to going too it seems)

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/carwyn-jones-meet-labour-ams-13873438

Not good all round there.

[sjsl]

I think trial by Twitter or newspaper is unhelpful and damaging. There should be some clearer lines drawn, sexual assault is a crime which needs to be reported, some of the behaviour being discussed is an HR disciplinary matter, not criminal behaviour. But if it means organsations now look at their procedures that will be a positive thing ? much of this harassment went unreported at the time because people couldn't safely complain.

And if this encourages victims of assault to come forward, however long ago the assault took place, then that is a good thing as well.

[red devil]

We had all this with Gary Glitter some years ago, his records and TV appearances have been persona non grata ever since...

[KidKruger]

Stylophones became a lot cheaper on ebay too.

[Loz]

McCarthyism is not the right term. But there is something worrying going on.

We seem have staggered wildly from dismissing allegations without investigation to treating everyone as guilty without investigation. The question now is whether the tragic suicide of Carl Sargeant will calm things down a bit, as it does seem he was treated very poorly and unfairly.

In other words, we need to get to a place where allegations are taken seriously and the accused are treated fairly.

[keano77]

Ermmm ... I think there's more to come out on Carl Sargeant Loz

[JoeLeg]

There better be, otherwise people are going to feel that there is no chance for a fair hearing for the accused.

I broadly agree with Loz; new allegations are emerging all the time and while it's of vital importance that legitimate harrasment can be reported, challenged and dealt with, I worry there will be an automatic assumption that there is "no smoke without fire", a phrase I have often used thought is dangerous, and untrue.

[Loz]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ermmm ... I think there's more to come out on Carl Sargeant Loz

Quite possibly, but you say that like you already know he is guilty - and that is the exact danger I am referring to.

He may be guilty; he may not be. I certainly don't know. But don't you think it should have been fairly investigated before he was sacked? There is a massive, crucial difference between being "suspended subject to an investigation" and "sacked", as the latter implies guilt.

Plus it seems that they refused to tell him of what he was being accused. How is that fair?

As I said, it is completely right that something must change from where it was before. People should be confident that is they think they have been harassed or worse, they will be listened to and their allegations investigated.

[JohnL]

JoeLeg Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> There better be, otherwise people are going to

> feel that there is no chance for a fair hearing

> for the accused.

>

> I broadly agree with Loz; new allegations are

> emerging all the time and while it's of vital

> importance that legitimate harrasment can be

> reported, challenged and dealt with, I worry there

> will be an automatic assumption that there is "no

> smoke without fire", a phrase I have often used

> thought is dangerous, and untrue.

Mass hallucination (or whatever you call it) does exist

Remember this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orkney_child_abuse_scandal

[Robert Poste's Child]

Mass hallucination - really? More true to say the dam of mass cover-up finally wore thin enough for decades of suppressed incidents to flood out!

Surely with increased awareness around mental illness in recent years we all realise how sexual abuse and exploitation can ruin people's lives. Trauma often makes itself felt a long time after the event.

I certainly remember plenty of inappropriate comments and touching, and strippers in the office for people's birthdays (in the morning!) in the late 80s, and pretty colleagues being sexually harrassed up to maybe early 00s (I well remember the married head of legal who tried to make one of his juniors agree to have children with him). It went on for decades after attitudes and company policies had superficially changed. Ml

My own concern is that it feels fundamentally misguided to judge what happened in the past from today's viewpoint. It should be seen in the legal and social context in which it is alleged to have taken place - unless it involves children or other vulnerable people, in which case fire away.

[Blah Blah]

Houseoflego Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But removing someone from a film when there is

> absolutely no evidence is just not part of a

> modern democratic system of justice. Career's and

> reputations totally ruined on no evidence of

> anything illegal and often years ago when there

> was a very different culture!

>

> Is that ok? On that basis I think almost anyone

> could be taken down if they spoke out against the

> wrong people.

>

> Also not condoning anything Spacey did or did not

> do!

Would you extend that to the removal of Saville's headstone?

And when was there ever a culture that saw sexual harassment/ assault and rape as acceptable? It was not more acceptable at the time any more than it is now. It is just that now, we don't turn a blind eye.

[JohnL]

Robert Poste's Child Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mass hallucination - really? More true to say the

> dam of mass cover-up finally wore thin enough for

> decades of suppressed incidents to flood out!

>

> Surely with increased awareness around mental

> illness in recent years we all realise how sexual

> abuse and exploitation can ruin people's lives.

> Trauma often makes itself felt a long time after

> the event.

>

> I certainly remember plenty of inappropriate

> comments and touching, and strippers in the office

> for people's birthdays (in the morning!) in the

> late 80s, and pretty colleagues being sexually

> harrassed up to maybe early 00s (I well remember

> the married head of legal who tried to make one of

> his juniors agree to have children with him). It

> went on for decades after attitudes and company

> policies had superficially changed. Ml

>

> My own concern is that it feels fundamentally

> misguided to judge what happened in the past from

> today's viewpoint. It should be seen in the legal

> and social context in which it is alleged to have

> taken place - unless it involves children or other

> vulnerable people, in which case fire away.

I certainly believe most if not all of these accusations are true - but you have to keep in mind the possibility (devils advocate type thing). All cases need to be investigated and the accuser and accused given their rights.

You're right about espoused values and real values in companies - they don't match even now. In the pub a lot of touching still goes on (in my experience) - one pub recently I felt it was human pinball :)

Some people generally just don't like being touched at all though and they have that right too wherever they are.

[DovertheRoad]

As someone who has been falsely accused of something previously - it's not fun. It can destroy you. In my case it was someone I didn't even know. Whom I'd met twice briefly for a few seconds and said a brief hello to. At first I thought it was a joke - then it dawns on you that it's real. When you are 100% innocent and a decent, respectful, upstanding human it's beyond awful. And you're confused. Why would someone do this? The answers aren't always rational:

- Money

- Angry at the world, men/women in general and just want to get someone

- History of mental illness or personality disorder

When you're innocent, whatever you do, you can't win. You can follow "the process" and air a load of stuff publicly which can destroy your reputation, you can pay out (which as we've seen can still destroy your reputation - if it comes out down the line it's seen as an admission of guilt) or...there isn't really another decent option. You're screwed.

In my case it just went away. But for those who had to be involved there's always a whiff. You're tarnished.

I also suspect a number of the allegations are true, and welcome the sea change this should bring. But don't forget that amongst all this will be a significant % of innocent people who for whatever reason get targeted by opportunists looking for cash or just to settle some score in their head.

[JohnL]

DovertheRoad Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As someone who has been falsely accused of

> something previously - it's not fun. It can

> destroy you.

That's awful - and coming from Wales I know the culture their means someone like Carl Sargeant (whatever the truth of the matter) would have felt totally destroyed and unable to start again (it's a real goldfish bowl)

[Earl Aelfheah]

I do think that editing someone out of a film, based on allegations alone is a bit disproportionate. Whilst I accept that the accusations sound credible, that's not the same as their being proven.

[Robert Poste's Child]

He has apologised for quote 'deeply inappropriate behaviour' and he's 'seeking evaluation and treatment'. Doesn't look like a denial to me, and sheer number of stories must be enough to worry the producers about box office. Editing people in and out of films isn't uncommon given CGI and the use of body doubles and stunt people.