#MeToo backlash

[DrZoidberg]

A year after MeToo the result is that we trust victims coming forward less. I'll admit that this surprised me. But thinking a bit about it, it makes sense.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-d...-american-opinion-has-shifted-against-victims

 

[bigfield]

Fucking hell, people are stupid.

But thinking a bit about it, it makes sense.

What's your theory?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Fucking hell, people are stupid.

But thinking a bit about it, it makes sense.

What's your theory?

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

 

[Underseer]

Fucking hell, people are stupid.

But thinking a bit about it, it makes sense.

What's your theory?

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

Women are not believed because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn't see rape and sexual assault as all that bad as long as a man is doing it. That's why we attack victims when they come forward: it means actual consequences for a man, and what's the point of living in a male-dominated society if rapists and abusers have to face actual consequences.

The backlash is just an emotional reaction from woman-haters angry about the loss of privilege. As the old saying goes, when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. If anything is responsible for this phenomenon, it's the loud angry and hateful things people have been saying about victims who come forward, which is exactly why they didn't come forward before the #MeToo thing started.

 

[thebeave]

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

Women are not believed because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn't see rape and sexual assault as all that bad as long as a man is doing it. That's why we attack victims when they come forward: it means actual consequences for a man, and what's the point of living in a male-dominated society if rapists and abusers have to face actual consequences.

The backlash is just an emotional reaction from woman-haters angry about the loss of privilege. As the old saying goes, when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. If anything is responsible for this phenomenon, it's the loud angry and hateful things people have been saying about victims who come forward, which is exactly why they didn't come forward before the #MeToo thing started.

Did you even look at the graph? The women themselves have gone negative on #metoo since last year in all three of the categories... at least as much, if no more so than the men. Are these women "woman haters" angry about their loss of privelege?

 

[Worldtraveller]

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

Women are not believed because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn't see rape and sexual assault as all that bad as long as a man is doing it. That's why we attack victims when they come forward: it means actual consequences for a man, and what's the point of living in a male-dominated society if rapists and abusers have to face actual consequences.

The backlash is just an emotional reaction from woman-haters angry about the loss of privilege. As the old saying goes, when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. If anything is responsible for this phenomenon, it's the loud angry and hateful things people have been saying about victims who come forward, which is exactly why they didn't come forward before the #MeToo thing started.

Did you even look at the graph? The women themselves have gone negative on #metoo since last year in all three of the categories... at least as much, if no more so than the men. Are these women "woman haters" angry about their loss of privelege?

And a lot of those women also fall into the 'Trump voters' camp. The fact that there's backlash doesn't really mean that the #metoo movement is in some way flawed. There was (and still is) a lot of backlash to the civil rights act of 1964, too. I'd be willing to bet some of it was by black people and other minorities.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to try to figure out why that may be.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I'm of the opinion that it's both good that women are speaking out more and it's good that there's more backlash. It's a conversation which we need to have as a society and we need to figure out what to do about it.

The fact is that most sexual assaults are he said / she said scenarios where there isn't more evidence available beyond which one you believe more. People shouldn't have their lives ruined by unverified accusations but they also shouldn't get a pass on assaulting women. I have no idea how to resolve the two things, but it is something which needs to be discussed.

 

[ronburgundy]

The chart shows that this backlash is coming entirely from Trump supporters, who were already 2-3 times more likely to disregard assault and harassment as serious problems, and now are 4-5 times more likely.

So, any explanation lies in the psychological/ideological factors that differentiate Trump supporters. Game theory doesn't explain it at all.
Not only would that not account for the change being specific to Trump supporters, but it doesn't even make sense in relation to the the first variable reported, which is people believing that "False accusations are a bigger problem than unreported assaults."
Sure, if more women are believed without question, then there would be some amount of increased motive to game that system and make false accusations. However, that would only predict an increase in the absolute raw # of false accusations, not an increase in believing that false accusations are actually more frequent than unreported assaults. Not only would that not change, but anyone who endorses that idea is a dangerously raving idiot ignoring all the available facts. Yes, false accusations do occur at a rate higher than many here are willing to acknowledge and those #s might rise do to a push to treat all accusations as true regardless of corroboration, but the evidence is that false accusations are and will remain a fraction of the frequency of unreported assaults.

One has engage in extremely dishonest denial of facts motivated by misogynist ideology to think that false accusations are not merely increasing but "a bigger problem than unreported assaults". Which explains why 1 in 3 Trump supporters do, since we already have lots of other evidence that Trump himself is a vile misogynist and prone to lying about clear facts and that much of his support is derived from people who find these to be positive traits. And yes, that can easily apply to the female Trump supporters, just as there are plenty of women who endorse the misogyny inherent to Abraham religion. Also, dismissal of sexual assault is part of the alt-right narrative and a form of "virtue-signalling" to indicate you are a diehard Trump supporter. So, those women (almost all white) who support Trump for other reasons (e.g. his support of racists and homophobes) may also agree with such sentiments about sexual assault as a way to signal "I'm with Him"

 

[DrZoidberg]

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

Women are not believed because we live in a patriarchal society that doesn't see rape and sexual assault as all that bad as long as a man is doing it. That's why we attack victims when they come forward: it means actual consequences for a man, and what's the point of living in a male-dominated society if rapists and abusers have to face actual consequences.

The backlash is just an emotional reaction from woman-haters angry about the loss of privilege. As the old saying goes, when you're used to privilege, equality feels like oppression. If anything is responsible for this phenomenon, it's the loud angry and hateful things people have been saying about victims who come forward, which is exactly why they didn't come forward before the #MeToo thing started.

Hm... "Because patriarchy" has become such a lazy knee-jerk thing to say by the left that I find it less and less useful as a term. What do you mean exactly?

I think you are mixing two things.

1) our ability to evaluate who is guilty and who is innocent
And
2) how much we punish those who are caught.

Even the most sexist pigs in the world want to protect and defend the women they care about. Patriarchal oppression won't change that. So the patriarchy is unlikely to have an influence on our ability to detect guilt.

 

[laughing dog]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

Well, just don’t stand under a tall tree during a storm.

Oh wait, I was thinking about being struck by lightning, which is yet another thing which is a bigger problem than false claims of sexual assault.

 

[ruby sparks]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

Yeah me too. It's only slightly reassuring that it's a minority. I wonder what would cause even a minority (or anyone at all, as you say) to feel that?

For example, it's hard to imagine it being said about, for example, burglary, or other types on non-sexual assault.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

How about this theory. It's a re-assuring belief. It's something you want to be true, so you decide it is. A bit like believing in Heaven. It's a super dumb belief, yet common.

It reminds me of laws against begging for money. What we don't like is the beggars being visible. We know poverty is a problem. We just don't like thinking about it. Out of sight out of mind.

Unreported sexual assaults aren't visible. So no problem for us. Reported false sexual are visible but shouldn't be. Problem for us.

Don't you think it's something like that?

 

[ruby sparks]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

How about this theory. It's a re-assuring belief. It's something you want to be true, so you decide it is. A bit like believing in Heaven. It's a super dumb belief, yet common.

It reminds me of laws against begging for money. What we don't like is the beggars being visible. We know poverty is a problem. We just don't like thinking about it. Out of sight out of mind.

Unreported sexual assaults aren't visible. So no problem for us. Reported false sexual are visible but shouldn't be. Problem for us.

Don't you think it's something like that?

I think that's one candidate explanation, yes.

 

[Lion IRC]

There might be some women who regret the knee jerk overreaction by men who are now fearful of doing anything "inappropriate". And they regret the unintended consequence of gradually disappearing "appropriate" behaviour.

Some women say #MeToo! because they wish they hadn't experienced unwanted attention.
But for other women #MeToo? could mean..."can I please have that attention if she doesn't want it"

"Faint heart never won fair maiden" is a bit too nuanced for your average caveman living in 2018

 

[laughing dog]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

How about this theory. It's a re-assuring belief. It's something you want to be true, so you decide it is. A bit like believing in Heaven. It's a super dumb belief, yet common.

It reminds me of laws against begging for money. What we don't like is the beggars being visible. We know poverty is a problem. We just don't like thinking about it. Out of sight out of mind.

Unreported sexual assaults aren't visible. So no problem for us. Reported false sexual are visible but shouldn't be. Problem for us.

Don't you think it's something like that?

For some people, I think that would be accurate. But from many threads in this forum, I think there are people who honestly believe false claims are a bigger problem than actual but unreported claims.

 

[ronburgundy]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

How about this theory. It's a re-assuring belief. It's something you want to be true, so you decide it is. A bit like believing in Heaven. It's a super dumb belief, yet common.

It reminds me of laws against begging for money. What we don't like is the beggars being visible. We know poverty is a problem. We just don't like thinking about it. Out of sight out of mind.

Unreported sexual assaults aren't visible. So no problem for us. Reported false sexual are visible but shouldn't be. Problem for us.

Don't you think it's something like that?

No. Reported false assaults are not any more visible. Far more people know someone who was assaulted and did not report it than know someone who was falsely accused (although I know both).
And how is it "comforting" to believe that tons of innocent people are going to prison for being falsely accused?

And while thinking that rapes are far less common than they are is comforting, it is at least if not much more comforting to liberals and Clinton voters, who unlike Trump voters don't believe that many rape victims deserve it. Yet, 85% of those who think false reports are a bigger problem are Trump voters. So, your explanation doesn't make sense.

Both basic common sense and the empirical evidence show that unreported assaults are around 20 times more common than false reports. In order to think false reports are a "bigger problem", one must either deny the basic common sense and scientific evidence showing that unreported assaults are 20 times more common, or think that a man being falsely accused is more than 20 times worse than a women being raped. Only a person whose empathy for women in general was hindered by misogynist ideology would believe either of those, and that includes the women who believe it, most of whom are Trump supporters and accept much of the misogyny inherent to Judeo-Christian culture.

The only explanation that would make sense is one where the motivation behind the belief is similar to the motivation behind much of the support for Trump. Only that could explain the pattern of the data. Since we know that Trump is an outspoken misogynist who finds it a cool brag to talk about all the women he has sexually assaulted and many of his supporters regularly engage in misogynistic rhetoric, then the clear parsimonious explanation for the pattern of data is the unsurprising fact that misogynists vote Trump and devalue the importance of rape.

 

[bilby]

I find it fascinating that anyone could think a false claims of sexual assault are a bigger problem than unreported actual claims.

How about this theory. It's a re-assuring belief. It's something you want to be true, so you decide it is. A bit like believing in Heaven. It's a super dumb belief, yet common.

It reminds me of laws against begging for money. What we don't like is the beggars being visible. We know poverty is a problem. We just don't like thinking about it. Out of sight out of mind.

Unreported sexual assaults aren't visible. So no problem for us. Reported false sexual are visible but shouldn't be. Problem for us.

Don't you think it's something like that?

For some people, I think that would be accurate. But from many threads in this forum, I think there are people who honestly believe false claims are a bigger problem than actual but unreported claims.

Well, it's a value judgement.

Everyone agrees that murder is more serious than littering. But when you are living a comfortable and privileged life in which murder is something that happens to strangers, and not your own family or friends, you are more likely to lobby for efforts by the authorities to catch the bastard who keeps dumping his trash on your front lawn than you are to lobby for more funding for the local homicide squad.

When you are more likely to rape than to be raped, you lobby for accused rapists to be given as much presumption of innocence as possible.

And if you regularly mistreat women, you fear their possible retaliation, far more than you worry about them being attacked.

 

[TSwizzle]

It's just game theory. The more women are believed, the more women will game the system and make false accusations. I think that's why we tend to punish victims. Ie, if we hear an accusation we'll treat the accused as guilty, but we'll also tend to treat the accuser as falsely accusing. As a way to hedge the bets. It's the only way to guarantee that we're not being fooled.

And we're a social species. These kinds of accusations must have been around from the time we were hunter/gatherers. Which implies that we have sophisticated psychological machinery, already in place, to ferret out who is guilty.

Which suggest that we've already reached an equilibrium regarding trust/distrust of these kinds of accusations. So the more women are believed, the more women exploit the increased trust, which decreases trust, and so on ad infinitum. Equilibrium.

I think it could be a problem with the context(?) of the question, sort of. I think when the overwhelming chatter in the news about sexual harassment revolves around Hollywood/entertainment industry people are turned off by it or desensitized. So when you ask the question, people are referencing that environment when they respond.

 

[DBT]

I see in the news that Australian actor John Jarret has to face Court for rape, something that is alleged to have happened back in the 70's.