Henry Cavill forced to apologize for #metoo comments

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You are obsessed with this Lena one. I couldn't give a ****e.
The metoo movement is not just about rape victims, you referred to the whole metoo movement as professional whingers in the first post I quoted. This is a nasty comment to say about rape victims especially but also to other victims of harassment and abuse.

I mentioned her once as an example. If that indicates an obsession to you, then by your own definition you are clearly obsessed with misrepresenting my opinion rather than acknowledging what I actually said, which was -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

That's... not my view though?

As far as I can see the metoo campaign certainly has achieved it's aims of validating a certain class of professional whinger. It hasn't had any effect on people's daily lives other than anyone I know personally regarding it with contempt and ridicule.

If you want to effect real change and educate people, it starts a lot closer to home than twitter. It starts with yourself. Educating other people requires a bit more effort than simply telling them they don't have a clue, and they should listen and believe what they're told without question.

That isn't an attempt to educate anyone, it's an attempt to indoctrinate people with your own ideology, and that's what people disagree with, because it doesn't square with their reality.

I would suggest that the metoo movement was never about the victims of rape and sexual assault, but that it was purely about enabling as I suggested already - a certain class of professional whinger. There's a difference there between the two groups. It's a very specific difference that at this point you simply can't fail to have missed, but have chosen to ignore.

DONTMATTER wrote: »

Where did I say that I don't believe anyone? All I said is that even the most ardent anti metoo person has to admit that not all the women are liars.

No, that isn't all you said. Exactly what you said was -

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You don't have to believe every story, that's not the point.

The whole motivation for the existence of the metoo movement was because of women who claim they are not believed when they share their stories. It grew from one woman who chose to share her story because she felt she wasn't believed, and grew into many thousands of women sharing their stories because they too felt that they weren't believed, and yet here you are telling people that women who are brave enough to share their stories should be believed, while at the same time saying that we don't have to believe every story and that's not the point of the metoo movement.

It would be more helpful if you could get your own story straight.

And yes, celebrities are irrelevant. You are obsessed with them. Go talk to real life women. Ask them their stories, listen to them. After that you can still believe they are lying or they are whingers but at least you'll have got some real life experience of this and not something you read about in some celebrity gossip articles.

It's because I actually already talk to people who have experienced rape and sexual assault that I know they aren't the one dimensional professional whingers who are obsessed with portraying themselves as victims of men, that I can actually appreciate and acknowledge the difference between the two groups, something which you appear to have repeatedly and fundamentally misunderstood or misconstrued, as it doesn't fit neatly with your particular narrative.

DONTMATTER wrote: »

You mentioned her more than once. You seem celebrity obsessed.

Yes, you're calling victims of harassment and abuse professional whingers. You're backing up what I'm saying here.

Of course the metoo movement was about highlighting what many women go through. It's why it begun and it's why women posted their stories.

Exactly, so I didn't say that I didn't believe anyone and the anti metoo men can believe women are lying all they want but they can't claim they're all lying with a straight face. You're backing up my points again! You're confusing yourself here!

Well you can consider women who have been harassed and abused to be whingers, you can have contempt for them and ridicule them all you like but decent people will call that disgusting.

By the standards you appear to determine whether a person is decent or not, I certainly won't lose any sleep over your deliberations, as they are simply of no consequence to me.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It is of course a choice, it's a choice based upon credibility, and in order to believe the sheer volume of complaints, you would first have to believe the person claiming to have experienced what they claim to have experienced, is credible.

The movement is more than the sum of its parts. The credibility of a million experiences doesn’t come from zooming in on each experience, assessing its credibility, then doing an average. The credibility comes by virtue of the large number of similar experiences.

So where are the large number of women involved in metoo who have disbelieved other women’s metoo experiences?

Lena Dunham is one. Who else? You said there’s many.......

It's the very same scenario as your claims of the sheer volume of women who are sexually assaulted and raped, but I'm not sure if you actually got the point and intentionally sidelined it, or if you genuinely missed it altogether.

Could you point me to where I’ve made any claim about rapes or assaults?

But no, you don't actually know how seriously I take this matter, you want to believe I don't, as that would suit your narrative. However, my research hasn't just consisted of self-reports, which I would agree with you would be wholly unreliable, but rather it consists of research also conducted by people working with people every day who actually have been the victims of sexual assault and rape, not just the self-reports of people who claim to be victims.

How seriously you take the matter? Not what I said at all. I talked about how seriously you take self reports of women in metoo. And you’ve openly said you don’t take it seriously at all.

Can you please share more about the research you’re referring to? What do you mean by “working with”? Have these people some insight into the prevalence of sexual harrassment? By what methods did they gain this insight?

Nope, I don't think everyone is lying about their opinions, just the people who choose to express their opinions in public, and then roll back on their opinions to try and present the same opinion in a different way when those opinions of their experiences they claim have happened are subjected to questioning and criticism. It's very difficult to take a person like that seriously, let alone believe a word they're saying.

Where did the OP do that?

DONTMATTER wrote: »

Here's what you said:

"As far as I can see the metoo campaign certainly has achieved it's aims of validating a certain class of professional whinger. It hasn't had any effect on people's daily lives other than anyone I know personally regarding it with contempt and ridicule."

It's a scummy thing to say no matter how much you try to weasel out of it.

It's not a scummy thing to say at all, which is why I stand by what I actually said as opposed to your characterisation that I tried to weasel out of anything.

I just haven't allowed to you to spin what I said in order to fit your narrative based upon your perception of anyone who disagrees with you is all.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

What sort of a way to determine the credibility of any one individuals story is that? It simply goes back to what I said before that you believe it because you want to believe it. It's simply an example of confirmation bias.

Not at all. I earlier gave the example of a friend who did not want to believe the stories of metoo but was convinced by the sheer number of them, confirmed by talking to his gf. He’s pretty anti-feminist (as is his girlfriend).

A high number of people sharing a similar experience is evidence in itself. It has more credibility than one person sharing an experience.

Ok that one obviously did go over your head. I also mentioned Hillary Clinton, and Meryl Streep, and there were many other women involved in the metoo movement who turned a blind eye to other women and tried to discredit them for speaking out about their experiences as part of the metoo movement.

I can’t find anything that suggests Hilary Clinton was involved in the metoo campaign.

Meryl Streep seems to talk a bit about it but has been criticised from the start by those involved in metoo so she doesn’t seem to be heavily involved in the movement either.

In fact the Lena Dunham example doesn’t hold up either as the Thor actress was criticising her for not basically pretending to be involved.

Any real examples?

That wasn't the claim I made. I didn't say you made any claim about rapes or sexual assaults. I was referring to your claims of the sheer volume of women (women who as part of the metoo movement have made claims of sexual assault and rape), women who by virtue of their numbers who have made claims, you happen to believe them on that basis.

Nope never mentioned sexual assaults and rape. I have consistently said sexual harrassment.

I take the matter of anyone, regardless of their gender, sex, age, sexual orientation or age, who have experienced rape and sexual assault seriously enough that I think the metoo movement has actually done damage to them. The metoo movement presents a certain narrative, and if you don't fit with that narrative, or if you disagree with that narrative, then you are characterised as someone who doesn't support women who have experienced rape and sexual assault. Fortunately, the metoo movement doesn't represent the vast majority of women who have experienced rape and sexual assault, let alone the vast majority of people I referred to earlier, so the damage they have really done for people who have been raped and sexually assaulted, is limited.

And how did you come by this knowledge that the metoo movement does not represent the vast majority of women who have experienced rape and sexual assault?

Did women tell you this? Did you believe them? Well clearly you don’t believe self reporting so I assume you have some kind of study that backs this up that is not based in self reporting? Can I see it?

I don't take the metoo movement seriously, because it only represents a tiny minority of people who claim to have experienced rape and sexual assault.

Again how did you come by this knowledge?

I think the term working with people who have experienced sexual assault and rape was self-explanatory. I don't know why you'd try to be so obtuse about it. The research I was referring to comes from organisations like RCNI and RAINN, from the Department of Justice, from Courts Services annual reports, and from other organisations which work with people who have been the victims of sexual assault and rape. They gained this insight as I said from working with people who have experienced rape and sexual assault, not simply from the sheer volume of unverifiable reports on social media.

Ok so can you provide one example study? I can’t debate you unless I know exactly what claim you’re making, what it’s based on , and the methodology involved.

Does the RCNI deal with harassment?

I didn't say the OP did that. You asked a completely separate question. I gave you a completely separate answer.

Oh so you’re still trotting our this nonsense that I made an allegation, couldn’t support it, then restated it as a question?

Sigh.

Here we go again:

1. I (wrongly) assumed that like most people, you would believed the experiences of a large number of people. This was not an “allegation” as I don’t view it as a negative thing. I think it’s normal to believe large numbers of people saying the same thing about their experiences.

2. You said you wouldn’t believe a million people.

3. This changed my mind. I freely admit it. I was wrong. You were not the kind of person who believes large numbers of people.

4. I never restated this “allegation” as a question.

5. You are confusing the above “allegation” of which I was wrong and am happy to admit it, with the other “allegation” which was that you would not believe the experience of a million people.

6. The second “allegation” you’ve repeated and stood by a number of times since so it’s not even an “allegation” it’s just the truth.

7. The second “allegation” (that you don’t believe a million people’s experience) is an extreme opposite of the first “allegation” (that you would believe the experience of a large number of people) so it’s really bizarre that you seem to think they’re the same.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

How is that not an example of confirmation bias?

Um because it doesn’t confirm a preexisting belief or hypothesis he had. The exact opposite in fact.

Lol it’s right there in the link you posted.....

And no, no matter how high the number of people who claim to have shared an experience is, it doesn't have any more credibility than one person who has actually experienced it and has evidence that they actually experienced it. Otherwise, it's just a story, and one which you can either choose to believe, or not.

Of course it does. Which do you think would be more successful. A court case where one witness identified someone or a court case where ten witnesses identified someone?

The rest of your post contributes nothing to the discussion, and from experience I'm not particularly interested in entertaining your nonsense any more than I've already done.

That’s your CHOICE. I’ll just take that as an admission that you can’t find anyone involved with metoo who has disbelieved women’s stories, that you can’t support your assertion that metoo does not represent the vast majority of rape and assault victims, and that you have no additional evidence on the veracity of metro claims of sexual harrassment.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It was confirmed as you suggested by the sheer number of them, and by his girlfriend. That either of them have issues with feminism doesn't make your anecdote any more credible than it wasn't already.

Wow you genuinely don’t understand confirmation bias do you?

It doesn’t matter if you think the evidence was faulty. It was not confirming a preexisting belief. It was changing his preexisting belief. It’s the very opposite of confirmation bias.

and if you have a female dominated jury, the likelihood of a successful conviction is zero.

What are you talking about?

You can't take something I haven't said as an admission of anything. You can certainly choose to believe what you want though, as you do :pac:

Well I assume if you had a decent rebuttal you’d make it.

Feel free to jump in at any time and tell me who these women involved in metoo who disbelieve women are. You said there were many.

And also feel free to tell me how you know that metoo does not represent the vast majority of rape and assault victims. I’m dying to know.

And please do tell what evidence RCNI or RAINN have provided to you that indicates that the experiences of metoo are not common amongst women.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'm hungover so maybe I'm wrong here, but isn't this about ten separate court cases, each with one witness, and because there are many court cases, each witness is believed more?

That's the sort of logic I'm seeing argued here for days. "There are so many stories, they must all be true. And even if not, we should still be believe them because there are so many."

I don't imagine a judge or jury would be allowed take the other active and totally separate court cases into account.

It’s a fair point. It’s not a perfect analogy. Though it doesn’t show that multiple reports have more weight than individual reports. Here’s a different analogy for you:

You’re considering moving to a country where (unrealistically) one million Irish people have recently moved.

You ask one person what it’s like over there. The person responds that it’s an unsafe country.

You ask a million people what it’s like over there. One million of them respond it’s an unsafe country.

Would you believe the reports in either of these situations? Would one situation give you more concern than another?

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Well you've just used the 10 witnesses, one case analogy again, but I see where you're coming from.
10 friends in 10 separate countries saying Ireland is crap does not make each person's claim more inherently true. But it would show that there is something there, and I don't think many here are disagreeing that there is a reason #metoo is what it is.


(I don't think Ireland is crap.)

Ok I take on board your criticism of my analogy. I’ll try again, again with plenty of unrealisticness:

There is a huge country to which many many Irish people have moved to.

You are thinking of moving there and as part of your research you do an internet search on personal safety of Irish immigrants in the country.

A. Your search returns one result where an Irish person recounts a negative safety experience in the country. Perhaps being mugged.

B. Your search returns one million results where Irish people recount individual negative safety experiences in the country. They range from muggings to physical assaults to to threats from neighbours, etc etc

Would you view A and B in the same way?

BTW I don’t think most people share oneeyedjacks quite extreme view.