Sexual Harassment

[Mr. Brooks]

No one has even come close to saying this. Pseudo, nor myself, are arguing that we replace jail with a group therapy session where everyone sits around a fire and sings kumbaya until everybody gets better and decides crime doesn't pay.

 

But more to my point, what needs to be redefined is "jail time". Scandinavian countries, I believe Norway in particular, have worked to change prison from "only punishment" to "punishment with a focus on rehabilitation". One of them even has prisons without locks on the cell doors. And, whaddya know, it works.

 

"Jail time" is fine with me. What's not fine is the American definition of what a prison system is and does, which results in extremely high rates of recidivism at an extremely high cost to the taxpaying public.

 

As for a life sentence for rape... if you don't see why that perpetuates a bad idea we've double- and triple-downed on already with little to no result, I don't really know what to say. The justice system *should* try to analyze the personal and societal impact of crime objectively, along with the potential for rehabilitation, and pass sentencing based on those criteria. Upping the sentence on a crime you severely dislike personally doesn't actually fix any problems, it just makes you feel good... in fact, it can actually damage any real progress to be made because you've "solved" the problem and moved on to other things, even though it's not actually solved at all.

 

Sexual assault does not exist on an island within the individual perpetuator. It's as much a mental health and societal issue as it is personal. Yet you only wish to address the personal aspect of the crime and expect the desired outcome to be achieved (and you wish the justice system to remain as currently constituted, it seems, as you haven't mentioned anything but changing of sentencing). Yet we have mountains of studies that show increased sentences don't actually reduce crime, but we have a fair amount of evidence that retooling the justice system actually does.

I'd be all for changing how we manage prisoners. That sounds like a great idea to me. A focus on rehabilitation while in prison, rather than the current system of training grounds for criminals would be much better, I agree. I don't think I've implied otherwise.

 

I read back, and no, nobody explicitly said "never jail under any circumstances", but Psuedo did say only as a last resort.

 

Rehabilitation and deterrent is only one side of the coin. I'm all for that, but the other side of the coin is punishment, and justice for the victim.

That side of the coin may not be constructive, but I don't think it has to be. Some crimes need to require punishment, and victims deserve justice, not to be told "the guy who raped you is a victim too".

Nowhere here have I claimed those two sides need to be mutually exclusive.

I have a hard time believing you or Psuedo would look a sexual assault victim in the eye and tell them they don't deserve justice, the perpetrator is a victim too. Maybe you would, but I don't think so.

 

I'd also like my questions answered.

1) Is any crime severe enough that it should require some jail time at a minimum? Simple question.

2) What consequences do you suggest that don't involve jail time? Real consequences with teeth. I keep hearing, "yes, there should be consequences, but jail doesn't help". Ok, what are these consequences? Maybe I can have my opinion changed.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I'd also like my questions answered.
1) Is any crime severe enough that it should require some jail time at a minimum? Simple question.
2) What consequences do you suggest that don't involve jail time? Real consequences with teeth. I keep hearing, "yes, there should be consequences, but jail doesn't help". Ok, what are these consequences? Maybe I can have my opinion changed.

1. Absolutely. That is without question in my mind. If you murder someone or rape someone, you don't get therapy and we call it a day. You face incarceration, though how we incarcerate is really the problem in my eyes. I firmly believe in min-max sentencing guidelines, as it creates some balance in a wildly unbalanced system where race, gender, and socio-economic status play as much or more of a role in the sentencing as the actual crime.

 

2. Different forms of incarceration are a good place to start, with a minimization of "incarceration" and a maximization of "rehabilitation" to varying degrees based on the offender and/or crime. We make only the most feeble attempt at rehabilitation and preparing a criminal to face the world as a productive citizen upon release and it's only gotten worse over the past couple of decades thanks to privatization of the prison system. Look around the world and choose models that seem to work best and then emulate those models. The Scandinavian systems seem to be a good place to start.

[Craig Arko]

Sentencing for convicted sex offenders (particularly of the serial variety)? Consider what the British government did to Alan Turing for what was effectively a victimless charge.

[Mr. Brooks]

1. Absolutely. That is without question in my mind. If you murder someone or rape someone, you don't get therapy and we call it a day. You face incarceration, though how we incarcerate is really the problem in my eyes. I firmly believe in min-max sentencing guidelines, as it creates some balance in a wildly unbalanced system where race, gender, and socio-economic status play as much or more of a role in the sentencing as the actual crime.

 

2. Different forms of incarceration are a good place to start, with a minimization of "incarceration" and a maximization of "rehabilitation" to varying degrees based on the offender and/or crime. We make only the most feeble attempt at rehabilitation and preparing a criminal to face the world as a productive citizen upon release and it's only gotten worse over the past couple of decades thanks to privatization of the prison system. Look around the world and choose models that seem to work best and then emulate those models. The Scandinavian systems seem to be a good place to start.

Ok well, aside from life for the most severe rape cases, it looks like you agree with me.

Saying i wasn't interested in HOW we imprison people was a baseless assumption, and unfair. The only reason i hadn't said anything in that regard specifically, was because I hadn't yet moved past the basic point of imprisonment as a starting point.

Prison reform was actually my #1 voting concern coming into Nov. '16 elections, and i think I even posted as much here.

 

I'm all for treatment, absolutely. As long as it's in addition to, or after consequences when there is a victim. A persons right to their mental health ends at the point they commit an illegal act against another person.

Perhaps I could have been more vocal about being for treatment as well, but I was put on the defensive right out of the gate.

 

And, I appreciate you answering my questions. It was helpful.

[Mr. Brooks]

1. Absolutely. That is without question in my mind. If you murder someone or rape someone, you don't get therapy and we call it a day. You face incarceration, though how we incarcerate is really the problem in my eyes. I firmly believe in min-max sentencing guidelines, as it creates some balance in a wildly unbalanced system where race, gender, and socio-economic status play as much or more of a role in the sentencing as the actual crime.

 

2. Different forms of incarceration are a good place to start, with a minimization of "incarceration" and a maximization of "rehabilitation" to varying degrees based on the offender and/or crime. We make only the most feeble attempt at rehabilitation and preparing a criminal to face the world as a productive citizen upon release and it's only gotten worse over the past couple of decades thanks to privatization of the prison system. Look around the world and choose models that seem to work best and then emulate those models. The Scandinavian systems seem to be a good place to start.

Forgot to mention, I think privatization of prisons is awful and unconstitutional. I'm with you there.

[Champuckett]

It appears the hysteria happening in Hollywood and the entertainment industry may be spilling over into politics in a bigger way than originally thought. Victims are feeling more empowered and compelled to come forward now that they have more support.

 

We now have Alabama's Judge Moore with a growing number of accusers and Senator Menendez on trial with sexual allegations as we speak. A Californian Democrat Congresswoman Jackie Speier spoke recently about the problem on Capitol Hill citing 260 settlements in the last 2 decades for sexual harassment amounting to more than $15 million. In addition, there seems to be increased talk about prominent figures Dennis Hastert (former convicted GOP Speaker of the house), Joe Biden, and Bill Clinton as victims continue to come forward. All of these politicians are people from both sides of the aisle and some accusations that were made as many as 4 decades ago are now becoming more relevant in the current climate and being talked about more openly.

[ashbury]

And then there's Terry Crews in this interview. Interesting compare-and-contrast situation on multiple levels.

[Doomtints]

Franken.  :/

 

Regarding privatization of prisons ... politicians in the mid 90s ran on a platform of being tougher on crime.  The three strikes rules, etc.  More prisons were built nationwide.  And then ... the prisons were empty.  Laws were changed to fill them, which unfortunately meant people of color were imprisoned for things that whites were not.

 

Yeah, this is backwards, broken thinking which will be difficult to reverse.

[Vanimal46]

Maybe we need to rename this thread to Sexual Harassment in Pop Culture or something. 

Matt Lauer is the next person to get fired for sexual harassment... Variety has an exclusive that details what he did to poor women that worked for NBC. 

 

I never cared much for Lauer in the first place. But man, what he did was ****ing creepy. 

[Champuckett]

Yeah, the button on his desk that would lock the door reminds me of an 80's or 90's comedy movie trying to portray a creepy corporate boss that loved using perverted tactics in order to obtain his women.

 

The fact that fellow employees knew about this for a long time, including Couric mentioning it a number of years ago, yet nothing was done by the bosses in the suits at the top shows a culture that enabled this type of behavior. This seems to be becoming a trend, not an exception to workspace environments as these scandals continue to blossom. These business runners at the top will eventually have their feet held to the fire for allowing this to go on for so long.

 

A talent booker for the 'Today Show' just got caught as well and has been fired. And a producer for the Jake Tapper show on CNN. Our own Garrison Keillor was just fired from MPR for more inappropriate behavior. It's going to continue getting worse, not better.

[Squirrel]

In pop culture? Seriously? Why limit it to just that?

[PseudoSABR]

 

In pop culture? Seriously? Why limit it to just that?

You think he intentionally was suggesting to limit the scope of discussion? It was a pretty innocent suggestion that was meant to broaden the discussion, not narrow it.  Call it Men are Pigs, the point is to have a thread to deal with the trend of men in prominence and power finally facing consequences for their awful behavior. 

[nicksaviking]

 

Maybe we need to rename this thread to Sexual Harassment in Pop Culture or something. 

 

 

 

  Call it Men are Pigs, the point is to have a thread to deal with the trend of men in prominence and power finally facing consequences for their awful behavior. 

 

Sounds good to me, since Van was on board and he started the thread in the first place.

[Craig Arko]

I have a hard time seeing how saying 'men are pigs' is going to lead to any improvement, whether true or not.

 

I suggest folks take a look at some of their own behaviors; there have been some game thread comments that are in really poor taste, for example. If we all cleaned up our own acts first, perhaps improvement in the future will follow.

[Squirrel]

I have a hard time seeing how saying 'men are pigs' is going to lead to any improvement, whether true or not.

 

I suggest folks take a look at some of their own behaviors; there have been some game thread comments that are in really poor taste, for example. If we all cleaned up our own acts first, perhaps improvement in the future will follow.

Yes, thank you. This is where it starts. I tried to respond to pseudo last night and it just didn’t come out how I wanted. But this is just right. Thanks for articulating it in a way I couldn’t.

[Craig Arko]

 

Yes, thank you. This is where it starts. I tried to respond to pseudo last night and it just didn’t come out how I wanted. But this is just right. Thanks for articulating it in a way I couldn’t.

Yeah, well, A ) I despise labels. B ) It distracts from taking a topic seriously, a notorious Trump tactic. C ) I won't claim innocence here, but I prefer modifying my behavior instead of insulting myself for it, and then pretending that's all it takes.

[PseudoSABR]

 

Yes, thank you. This is where it starts. I tried to respond to pseudo last night and it just didn’t come out how I wanted. But this is just right. Thanks for articulating it in a way I couldn’t.

To be clear, I wasn't seriously suggesting that we should title it Men are Pigs (though I did laugh when Nick made that the title), I was pushing back against what I felt was a rather innocent suggestion,  though as it seems there was probably some subtext that I wasn't privy to underlying your post.   In the future if you find yourself not being able to respond to a post of mine, PMs are always appreciated.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 

I suggest folks take a look at some of their own behaviors; there have been some game thread comments that are in really poor taste, for example. If we all cleaned up our own acts first, perhaps improvement in the future will follow.

There's a reason that sport message boards in general don't have many women users--anonymity contributes to allowing and buying into so-called locker-room talk. 

 

I can think of few BYTO threads that weren't the most welcoming to female users; though those days are gone, we all can still slip into sloppy acquiesce to base sexist humor (and probably worse).

[Squirrel]

 

To be clear, I wasn't seriously suggesting that we should title it Men are Pigs (though I did laugh when Nick made that the title), I was pushing back against what I felt was a rather innocent suggestion,  though as it seems there was probably some subtext that I wasn't privy to underlying your post.   In the future if you find yourself not being able to respond to a post of mine, PMs are always appreciated.

The problem wasn't responding to you in either public or private ... it was me not finding the right words.

[Vanimal46]

 

To be clear, I wasn't seriously suggesting that we should title it Men are Pigs (though I did laugh when Nick made that the title), I was pushing back against what I felt was a rather innocent suggestion,  though as it seems there was probably some subtext that I wasn't privy to underlying your post.   In the future if you find yourself not being able to respond to a post of mine, PMs are always appreciated.

 

I appreciate it, but it wasn't necessary to push back. This thread evolved from Louis CK, the original topic. Lately a lot of men getting in trouble are in media/pop culture, so that was the first thing that came to mind. We can continue discussing sexual harassment on a broader scale, though. 

 

If there's any positive out of this, it's that some entitled, despicable men's antics are finally coming to light. As others on this thread posted, they've heard in the past that Louis CK did things like this to women. I recall hearing something like this in the past with Matt Lauer. Unfortunately we forget these things over time, which isn't fair to the women they did this to. 

 

It had to be incredibly intimidating for women speaking up about Lauer, for example. From what the Variety article said, NBC ignored and dismissed several red flags about Lauer's behavior over the years. I'm glad they didn't back down to a powerful figure, and made us all aware how bad these people really are behind closed doors. 

[Craig Arko]

 

There's a reason that sport message boards in general don't have many women users--anonymity contributes to allowing and buying into so-called locker-room talk. 

 

I can think of few BYTO threads that weren't the most welcoming to female users; though those days are gone, we all can still slip into sloppy acquiesce to base sexist humor (and probably worse).

Yeah, this is why I use my real name. I depend on my Armor Class rather than cover or concealment.

[DaveW]

I view this all as a MASSIVE market correction, speaking to folks in the media industry and film industry they are all saying this is all just the very tip of the tip of the iceberg.

Going to be a very interesting next 6-12 months as more and more 'men in power' get taken down, literally the only one who may be safe at this point is Trump, but Russia should bring him down quite nicely.

I think when we look back in 15-20 years this will be viewed alot like the Gay Rights and even Civil Rights movement. 

The world is a real **** hole right now, but at least we are doing a couple things during this time that will at least make the world a better place for groups who have been unfairly crapped on for far too long:

Women and LGBTQ community.

[Squirrel]

When a friend of mine lamented, 'Not Garrison Keillor, too???' on FB, I responded ... 'I'm not surprised by anyone at this point in life. Not one iota. The only thing that 'surprises' me is that it has taken this long to come about.'

 

I hope that in this process innocent people, both men and women, are not part of the fallout and that opportunists don't muck up the waters by making baseless claims in attempts to jump on the train of  necessity of what is happening now. But it has been a long time coming in just about every sector of life. There have always been whispers and innuendos. Even my alma mater is starting to, finally, listen to its students and former students and in what seemed like an overnight decision, stripped a building of its name, named after a former professor, and are taking steps to rename other parts and programs to remove other names of the past from positions of honor. Professors that I once took classes from. I didn't experience the pain others did, but there were always 'whispers' of 'things.' Always. Keillor wasn't a surprise to me, either. I'm in a related field and again, whispers. Pay homage to the patriarch and you'll be fine. But you won't. Play the game and be a good little girl and you'll be fine. But you won't. Don't speak up and just go along and you'll be fine. But you won't. While I haven't experienced the depth of what others have, thankfully, there have been times when there has been no good path to take. I was one of the very few lucky ones who managed to miss most of the landmines. So, if I seem 'overly sensitive,' maybe I'm not.

[DaveW]

 

When a friend of mine lamented, 'Not Garrison Keillor, too???'

Garrison Keillor is one of the more appalling ones, instead of showing (or even faking) some sort of remorse he is wearing it like a badge of honor.

What a sick scum bag.

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

I hope that in this process good people, both men and women, are not part of the fallout 

What do you mean by fallout? How do you know Franken is not a good person?

[Squirrel]

 

What do you mean by fallout? How do you know Franken is not a good person?

Innocent people. I'll change that.

 

 

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

 

Innocent people. I'll change that.

That makes more sense. 

 

[snepp]

 

Yeah, this is why I use my real name. I depend on my Armor Class rather than cover or concealment.

 

AC can only take you so far, at some point THAC0 will eventually win out.

[Craig Arko]

AC can only take you so far, at some point THAC0 will eventually win out.

Well, not yet.

[drjim]

It was inevitable, but it is no officially a bi-partisan Congressional affair. (I'm not counting the President or soon to be elected Senators)