#make a movie about how our legal system fails survivors

[winepresswrath]

the thing about saltburn is that i'm still recovering from how much i hated promising young woman. usually i don't get this mad at a movie but i've searched my feelings and the rage is still lurking beneath the surface.

[number1girl]

I don’t follow celebrities so I have very little idea what’s going on with Johnny depp but I’m really confused why everyone on tumblr is so adamant that he’s the one in the wrong when everywhere else the opposite opinion is popular? like i don’t get it

yeah i’m not sure, I think it’s because tumblr has always been the “social justice” website lmao, so maybe there are less totally shameless men’s rights activists on here. or maybe it’s because the bot farms depp and his team have been using to orchestrate a smear campaign against amber heard are more active on twitter. but still, there are pleeeennntttyyy of depp supporters on this website too.

can’t blame you for not caring about celebrities, but this case is imo pretty important in terms of the legal and cultural precedent it’s setting for victims of abuse, and also in terms of what it’s saying about the rampant misogyny in our society right now. 

long story short, johnny depp, 48, married amber heard, in her twenties (previously, he dated winona ryder when he was 26 and she was 17). he abused amber physically, emotionally, and sexually. there is extensive evidence of this. if you wanna learn more about how abuse works and what causes it (because there's a LOT of misinfo going around right now) I highly recommend the book Why Does He Do That?.

in 2016, she successfully filed a restraining order against him, and came forward with allegations of abuse. they divorced, and he had to pay her seven million dollars in the settlement, which she pledged to charity. they made a joint statement agreeing that neither party had made false accusations for financial gain (ie, depp wasn’t denying the abuse). he continued to be one of the highest paid actors in hollywood (he’s earned millions upon millions since amber first made her allegations), and didn’t lose any roles as a result of the allegations.

then, The Sun, a UK newspaper, ran a headline calling him a wifebeater. Depp took them to court for libel, in a country where it’s VERY hard to lose a libel case. It was supposed to be an easy win for him, but he lost, with a judge ruling that 12 out of 14 incidents of alleged abuse were proven "to the civil standard” (the other two were ruled likely, but didn’t have enough evidence to be proven). So - he’s now a court convicted wifebeater, and because of this, he was dropped from the new harry potter movie (but still paid!).

Amber Heard also wrote an op-ed where she identified herself as a survivor of abuse, but didn’t mention Depp by name. Depp is now suing her for defamation, in Virginia, where less strict anti-SLAPP laws make it easier for him to manipulate the court system for his own purposes. He’s claiming that her op-ed is the reason he lost movie roles/his career is in a downward spiral, even though, as I mentioned, he was dropped from the harry potter movie because of his OWN failed lawsuit. (also, he's an alcoholic and a coke addict, and people haven't wanted him on set for years because he's a menace who often can't shoot scenes because he's too drunk or high, costing studios lots of money, and is overall difficult to work with). he's also claiming that amber was the abusive one, which is patently not true. her use of violence (which she has been open about from the very beginning) was in self-defense; his was to control, dominate, and torture her. (and no, she did not cut his finger off).

I’ve made a ton of posts about this and im not gonna rehash all my opinions on this one ask lol, but you can search my blog or google (take everything with a grain of salt, though, because like i mentioned, depp's PR team has been pushing a scarily successful smear campaign against amber). @justiceamberheard is also a great source. But put simply:

[briamichellewrites]

106

Jayde was at home with Phoenix. They had gone to court and her petition was denied due to a lack of evidence. They were upset and he truly felt the system had failed her. He would hold the judge personally responsible if anything happened to her. Marilyn’s lawyer did everything he could to discredit her and he had done a great job of that. Her lawyer did everything she could to argue that she had a credible reason to believe her life was in danger.

No, the messages were just words. Because of the protective order being denied, Marilyn was free to do whatever he wanted. Phoenix had texted Chester to ask if he would help him install a security system for her house. After learning about what happened in court, he agreed right away! The system would involve motion-activated lights and cameras. It would also call the police automatically.

To keep her mind distracted, they sat in her room on the second floor. He had gone around the first floor and checked to make sure all of the windows and doors were locked - they were. His phone was in his pocket, just in case they needed to call the police. She brought up everything related to the project she was working on with Elton and David. Her brand new house. She should be enjoying it. Instead, she was in fear and it wasn’t fair.

interactionswithmanson: Guys, the legal system is fucked up. The judge decided to not make the order of protection permanent. The entire case was thrown out. I am so fucking pissed! I am also so scared because he knows where I live. I am exploring my options to keep BHW away from me. He is not going to stop. Because I just moved, that is not an option. Phoenix wants to sue the judge for liability if anything happens to me. One of the recommendations my lawyer had was to find out if there are more victims/survivors of BHW, who will come forward. If we file together, it might make our case stronger. I’m staying with Phoenix for now.

Since Rob and Brad were off the grid, they had no idea of Jayde going to court or that she had been visited by Marilyn. While scrolling through the news app on his phone, Brad noticed an article about her going to court. Rob was down at the front desk to ask for an extra blanket, so he decided to call her to see what the situation was. Why were she and Marilyn in court?

Instead of her, he got Phoenix. He told him everything, including her relapse. She was currently with him at her place. He then found out that Johnny had left to shoot a movie. How was she doing? She was very upset, understandably, and at the moment, was sitting outside. He was keeping an eye on her through the window. Why was he inside? He was making her something to eat. Her anxiety was making it hard for her to have an appetite. He also wanted to get her out of the house.

From where he was standing, he could see her putting her feet in her hot tub and splashing the warm water. It was a chilly evening, so the water felt nice. If it were warmer, she would put her bathing suit on and go for a swim. But it was too cold for that now. She couldn’t wait for it to be summer. Maybe she would host a pool party for the guys and their kids.

When supper was ready, he called her back inside. She got her socks and shoes after shaking the water off her feet. The kitchen smelled of steak stew with vegetables. He had bought the steak tips and chicken broth at the store the previous day because he knew she was going to be worn out, no matter what the verdict was. After coming back from court, he was grateful he had bought everything because she was not able to be out in public.

She was far too paranoid. He didn’t blame her.

“Reginald Kenneth Dwight”, he read from a piece of paper.

“Sir Elton Hercules John. I thought that Elton John was his real name for years. I don’t remember how I found out. I think he told me once. I told Johnny that I’ve known him for about eleven years but I don’t know him.”

He nodded. “Sometimes people, mostly older adults don’t talk about their past because it hurts too much. They only tell you stories of positive moments. But to truly know someone, you have to learn about the positive moments and the painful ones.”

“Kind of like me or Chester.”

“Yeah. We wonder what happened to you but we also realize that it’s too painful.”

“I was abused since I was younger. The monsters and aliens I keep seeing are the people who have hurt me.”

Did he want to know? Only if she felt comfortable. He was not going to force her. The first memory she had was of her with Jeffrey Epstein. She didn’t know who he was until she saw his picture online. He was a businessman, who was attracted to little kids. What happened? He would have her sit on his lap and he would tell her how pretty she was. The only time she remembered him touching her was when she was sitting on his lap. He had his hand on the inside of her thigh.

Harvey Weinstein. She never felt comfortable with him. He also liked little kids and women. She remembered how much he liked to smoke cigars. It smelled disgusting! She hated the smell of cigarettes or cigars. He was overweight, not to body shame him but it was one of the things that made him creepy. When she played with her Barbies on the floor, he would try to get close to her.

Someone would always come over and join in as if they could read her body language. One time her parents invited Kevin Spacey over but he never did anything. She heard him talking about little boys, so he was never going to try anything on her. The only reason why she remembered their names was because she used to see them all over the place. She was supposed to go on vacation with Jeffrey once but she decided to go on vacation with her dad and his family.

He bought her a Barbie car because he had heard her talking about it. It wasn’t even Christmas or her birthday. He just bought it. She loved that car.

“Do you know what him buying that meant?”

She nodded. “He was grooming me. I learned that in rehab. He did it so he could touch me. It’s that stupid game. They try little things to see how you react. If you don’t show you’re uncomfortable, they try something else. If you say no or show discomfort, they apologize and act like it was an accident. They tell you how pretty you are and they try to be your friend. It’s fucked up because it’s manipulation.”

Was she ever raped? No. Rob had saved her from that. Good. Did they ever babysit her? Yeah, they both did occasionally. Jeffrey used to bring what he was working on over and he always let her be curious. It was boring business stuff. He tried to explain what he was doing but she lost interest quickly.

“They both belong in prison but that’s never going to happen. They are too powerful. That’s why I haven’t told anyone who they are. I mean, not publicly. They could kill me and make it look like an accident and that’s not me being paranoid. They can call someone up and make it happen. If she came forward, she could be dead from an overdose or suicide. He believed her.

“I don’t want anything to happen to you.”

“I won’t tell anyone it was them.”

“Thank you.”

@zoeykaytesmom @feelingsofaithless @jovichic-bonjovi4ever @borhap-au @beneathashadytree @duffs-shot-glass @geo-winchester

[astoundingbeyondbelief]

A while back, I came up with an idea for a sequel to Godzilla (2014) centering around an offbeat take on Mothra. Some of you might remember me carrying on about it in group chats. Well, I was never able to set aside the time to hammer out a complete script, but I hope this 3,000-word outline proves entertaining. I started working on it before Kong: Skull Island came out, then reworked it into something that would align with that movie in a couple of marathon writing sessions.

GODZILLA WORKS IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS

It’s a Monday morning in 2014. Specifically, the morning after San Francisco was demolished by three prehistoric monsters and nearly vaporized by an American nuclear missile. Godzilla wakes up and drags himself back into the ocean. An intern at a local TV station loses her job for the headline that accompanies his departure: “King of the Monsters, Savior of Our City?” Few care. Seven billion people are busy contemplating a world where they are no longer the dominant species, and what they can do to survive it.

It’s Tuesday. A massive anti-nuclear protest around the former Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada turns violent. Similar gatherings around the country follow suit. Drs. Ishiro Serizawa and Vivienne Graham attend a meeting called by Monarch’s new director, U.S. lieutenant general Antonio Connor. He states that there’s only one way for the organization to quell the unrest its decades of secrecy have led to: find a way to kill Godzilla.

It’s Wednesday. WikiLeaks publishes scores of Monarch documents and videos, their source a total mystery. The papers contain information on the Castle Bravo strike, the Skull Island fiasco, the Janjira cover-up, and a series of cave paintings from around the world depicting Godzilla and creatures Monarch has named Rodan, Mothra, and Ghidorah. Translated at furious speed by amateurs and professionals alike, the documents are read all around the Earth – and beyond it. Two women onboard an alien vessel reel back in horror when they see the painting of Godzilla confronting Ghidorah.

It’s Thursday. The two women (they look like twins, actually) materialize in Oakland. Their presence goes unnoticed, coming as it does in the middle of a massive brawl between demonstrators and police. The former TV intern is among them, using her “King of the Monsters: Savior of Our City” sign as a blunt instrument. The twins dive right in, grabbing abandoned cans of spray paint and marking the nearest wall with an intricate symbol that resembles a cross inside a circle.

It’s Friday. Godzilla surfaces near the Senkaku Islands, earning him a Chinese H-bomb to the head. The weapon is remarkably similar to the high-yield device the U.S. thought would deal a killing blow against the King of the Monsters and his two opponents just a few days ago. It does nothing to Godzilla, but quite a lot to international tensions. Meanwhile, the U.S. invades Skull Island in a desperate face-saving measure, capturing a Skullcrawler for experimentation and driving Kong underground.

Five years later, Admiral Stenz’s carrier group is chasing Godzilla once again. This time, it’s on the attack, using unmanned surface vehicles to spray him with a newly developed (and newly legal) nerve gas called Hedrium. He responds by coughing a little and launching one of the boats a thousand feet into the air with a flick of his tail. The mood aboard the USS Saratoga is grim but resigned. No one expected this to work, least of all Serizawa and Graham, who are struggling to hide their vindication.

The boats abruptly return to the carrier group, not because they’re out of Hedrium but because Godzilla has entered Tokyo Bay. His destination: Haneda Airport, where the JSDF is engaging a giant reptile called Varan. Their battle is brutal but short: Godzilla breaks off one of the spines on his enemy’s back and slices his throat. After a triumphant roar, he returns to the sea.

In the post-action Monarch meeting, Director Connor spins the Hedrium operation as an unparalleled triumph – it is, after all, the first time humanity has managed to cause Godzilla any sort of harm. He’s confident that the nearly-finished Rods from God, a system which launches tungsten rods from a satellite at around Mach 10, will be even more successful. If that fails, well, even Godzilla won’t be able to resist a gravitational singularity. To the awe of most of the attendees, he unveils plans for the “Dimension Tide,” a cannon theoretically capable of firing a miniature black hole.

Serizawa and Graham are the only dissenters, and their objections quickly turn into a shouting match, the basics of which their colleagues have clearly heard many times before. After Connor threatens their jobs, the two scientists confer after the meeting and decide to leak the existence of the Dimension Tide project to the media; it’s a ludicrous waste of taxpayer money at best and a bringer of the apocalypse at worse. This will be no easy task, since they’ve never talked to the media in their lives.

From a San Francisco apartment covered in newspaper clippings and paintings of Godzilla, one of the media’s least reputable figures is putting her own spin on his latest appearance. To former TV intern Yukiko Saegusa, this is just the latest example of Godzilla doing a better job of protecting humanity than the organization formed specifically to fight monsters. The real wrongdoing, she asserts, is the U.S. deployment of a mysterious chemical weapon off the coast of Japan. As she shifts awkwardly into a rant about the second Pacific Rim sequel, her cameraman Mateo’s ringtone sounds. She rebukes him, but only for his song choice. Her apartment is supposed to be a Cosmos-free zone.

Who are the Cosmos? Why, only the world’s most popular pop duo, signed by Clark Nelson of Rolisican Records after a ballad they sang in an Oakland jail cell went viral. Their lyrics are enigmatic, written in a language that somewhat resembles Malay, but their vocal abilities and stagecraft border on the supernatural. They close their latest concert in New York the same way they always do: with a prayer for Mothra to defeat Godzilla, as she has so many other monsters in the past, and usher in a new era of peace. Their audience roars in approval. Fame, however, has brought them no joy. Only their most obsessive fans believe their devotion to the “Queen of the Monsters” is genuine; to everyone else, it’s just a charming gimmick. But they’ve come up with a way for Mothra to prove her benevolence beyond a shadow of a doubt before confronting Godzilla. (They would have sent her against Varan, but slept through the whole incident.) Ignoring Nelson’s protests – she’s a lunatic, a subversive, doesn’t even have a million subscribers – they call Yukiko to request an appearance on the next episode of her show. It takes her about two seconds to say yes.

The Cosmos smile politely at Yukiko’s apartment-wide Godzilla shrine as the interview begins. Well, it starts as an interview, then veers dramatically off course when the Cosmos start going on about how Ghidorah attacked their civilization thousands of years ago, leaving themselves and Mothra as the only survivors; their affection for Earth, which they first visited for the monsters but kept returning to for the people; their conviction that Godzilla, being powerful enough to slay Ghidorah, will inevitably threaten the world; etcetera. Yukiko is bored to tears, thinking it’s an expansion of their act. What she’s curious about is how a moth could beat a fire-breathing dinosaur who has literally eaten nukes for breakfast. Her guests propose a demonstration, one that will prove Mothra’s moral superiority to Yukiko’s hero. Every American can agree that slavery was wrong, so why is the most famous building constructed by slaves still standing?

The Cosmos’ signature metal armbands glow and they begin to sing. As they do, Mothra enters Washington, D.C. airspace, hovering above the White House. The mansion is evacuated as SAM batteries around the capitol open fire, but every missile explodes just before it reaches her. Mothra ignores them and circles the White House, forming a ring of energy. A ray shoots down from its center, obliterating 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Yukiko and Mateo watch slack-jawed as the first confused reports of Mothra’s activities pour in. The Cosmos, as serene as when they first walked into the room, ask if they find the demonstration convincing. Neither gets to answer, because Monarch agents burst into the apartment and tranquilize the four of them.

Now, Monarch is no stranger to abducting people who know too much, but never anyone as famous as the Cosmos, and it shows. Though the singers did not publicize their trip to San Francisco, and Yukiko was planning the video as a surprise, enough people figured out their whereabouts to make a secret raid impossible. Nelson whips the Cosmos’ 80 million Twitter followers into a frenzy. Protests break out in front of Monarch headquarters in Seattle. Unfortunately for Monarch, that’s where the Cosmos are headed. Director Connor wants to speak with them personally, and events are moving too quickly to bring them anywhere else.

The Cosmos refuse to answer any of Connor’s questions – he’s especially interested in what they know about Ghidorah and how they’ve managed to live for so long. In another room, Yukiko and Mateo frantically deny any collusion with their quite terrifying interviewees. Connor changes tactics, telling the Cosmos that the U.S. military killed Mothra with newly-developed atomic heat ray guns outside of Richmond. Their bracelets glow, then they spit in his face for such blasphemous lies. Realizing the significance of their jewelry, Connor orders it destroyed. The twins just scoff, speaking in unison for the first time: “She already knows where we are.”

As it happens, Godzilla knows where Mothra is too. The two monsters make a beeline for Seattle.

Meanwhile, Serizawa and Graham take advantage of the chaos to make copies of the Dimension Tide plans. A guard nearly catches them, but they are saved by the intervention of Mason Weaver, now a veteran Monarch agent. She lets slip afterwards that she was the one who went to WikiLeaks in 2014. When she found out about the plans to invade Skull Island and use Kong for target practice, there was nothing else to do.

Most of Monarch’s employees flee as Mothra casts a massive shadow on their headquarters, but Connor remains. He believes she can’t do anything but threaten them without hurting the Cosmos. He’s quite wrong. Mothra waits until the top floors of the building are empty, tears them off, and webs him to a wall. The Cosmos ascend on one of her legs as the fans outside scream themselves hoarse in celebration. They’re still partying a few hours later when a familiar roar pierces the air and everything goes to hell.

Godzilla, perhaps sensing the caliber of foe he’s facing, readies his atomic breath immediately. Mothra sets the Cosmos down and releases a golden pollen from her wings; his ray ignites it on contact and envelops him in a massive explosion. The match goes poorly for him after that. Weaving between skyscrapers and raining down slashes and laser beams, Mothra seems like she’s going to be able to do what two MUTOs could not. Thousands die as the fight rages on. Neither monster seems to notice.

At the behest of the Cosmos, their fans storm Monarch headquarters, liberating Yukiko and Mateo – as well as Graham and Serizawa, who got stuck in an elevator when Mothra’s arrival triggered a lockdown. They emerge just in time to see the conclusion of the monsters’ battle. With a seemingly erratic shot of his atomic breath, Godzilla decapitates the Space Needle, which falls directly onto Mothra. This time, he has no victory cry to offer; visible exhausted, he makes his way through Seattle, heading east.

Their faces ashen, the Cosmos announce that Mothra still lives. Until she recovers, they have a new mission: to document Godzilla’s path of destruction. For most of their fans, chasing the King of the Monsters is a bridge too far, but a few eccentrics sign on. Serizawa, Graham, Yukiko, and Mateo are among them, sensing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to study their obsession up close. Serizawa and Graham let the group into the Monarch garage, where they assemble a truly impressive caravan.

The scientists soon figure out the purpose behind Godzilla’s strange behavior. Using his atomic breath is a serious drain on his energy. When he used it against the MUTOs (collapsing afterwards), he had a handy source of radiation to absorb in the form of the nuclear missile that exploded offshore. Now he’s actively seeking out radioactive materials, and since there are no nuclear power plants left in North America… well, the situation is not good. It is, in fact, about as bad as it can get.

Godzilla’s destination is the ICBM sites around Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana. He’ll arrive in less than a day. If the missiles there don’t satisfy him, he’ll move on to the silos in North Dakota or Wyoming.

Thus begins a road trip like no other. The Cosmos, of course, oversee the livestream. It proves as popular as they hoped; never mind the viewers online, all the major networks are showing little else. Their fans are as worshipful as ever and help them sharpen their critique of Godzilla. It’s now clear that his existence is a threat to the delicate balance of nuclear power which has kept a third world war from breaking out. When this is over, he’s unlikely to stroll into Russia and devour some of their warheads to even things out.

All is not well with the twins, however. They’ve never had their connection with Mothra severed before, and the ferocity she displayed against Godzilla in Seattle disturbs them. If that’s what she’s like when left to her own devices, why should anyone on Earth trust her? And why doesn’t anyone besides their fans seem to appreciate her razing that old building in D.C.?

Serizawa and Graham are having the time of their lives, but pose as abductees, well aware that Monarch is listening and watching them through the others’ phones. It’s all they can do to keep prying eyes aware from the Dimension Tide plans, although with everything Godzilla and Mothra have just done, it remains to be seen if anyone will care when they’re published.

Yukiko and Mateo are hilariously out of their depth. Oh, they were from the moment the Cosmos called, but now that things have calmed down, it’s really setting in. Unable to offer alternative programming (their own phones are either in San Francisco or Seattle), they gravitate towards Serizawa and Graham. With paper and pens, the four make a chronicle of Godzilla’s trek across America. The taunts from the Cosmos and their fans are plentiful, but they do their best to ignore them.

There’s plenty to chronicle, even as the King of the Monsters proceeds without military opposition. While he shows little regard for any buildings unfortunate enough to stand in his path, he starts to walk around gas stations after the first one explodes underfoot. Likewise, he’s mindful of cars, people, and even deer. An attack from a militia group almost seems to make him smile. At night, he pauses to watch some shooting stars and growls at them. The members of the caravan debate endlessly over whether his periodic glances in their direction are acknowledgments or just a general scanning of his surroundings.

During this interlude, Monarch and the U.S. government make preparations on multiple fronts. Yukiko’s interview with the Cosmos is released to the public, albeit with all mentions of Ghidorah removed. The Rods from God are launched, with the stationary Mothra intended as their first target. (Connor has a nightmare where the rods bounce off her like a fistful of plastic straws.) Crews scramble to dismantle the ICBMs at Malmstrom, but it’s clear that Godzilla will have quite the selection to choose from when he arrives. Special forces and drones tail the caravan, waiting for the order to move in.

After Godzilla tears apart the first missile silo, the meal clearly giving him a shot in the arm, the President orders the remaining Malmstrom missiles to be launched into space. The Rods from God prepare to rain metal down on Mothra, but she chooses the moment before their launch to burst out of the Space Needle rubble and dart towards Godzilla. Their rematch is an ugly, face-to-face affair – no nuclear fire or eye lasers, just teeth and claws.

As the ground trembles, the folder with the Dimension Tide plans flies open, and Monarch takes notice. The special forces move in. Our heroes use their vehicles’ various anti-kaiju weapons to fight back, but their lack of combat experience makes the outcome inevitable. Surrounded, they prepare for the end. Instead they get Mothra, who picks up the remaining vehicles and blows away the soldiers with a single beat of her wings. Godzilla watches her set them back down with interest.

Then a curious thing happens. As Mothra reengages Godzilla, he hurls her away from him, seconds before getting speared by a dozen tungsten rods. It’s a devastating blow; his scream of pain shatters every window in the caravan still intact. Mothra hesitates before charging in again – to carefully help Godzilla remove each of the rods and seal his wounds with her webbing. The two start to converse, with the Cosmos helpfully translating Mothra’s end (and chiding her for her language). She persuades him to return to the Pacific, offering to bring him a docked nuclear submarine or two if he needs a boost before then. As he departs, she flies into space and returns with the Cosmos’ ship. The ramp automatically lowers and the Cosmos beckon their fellow monster-chasers inside.

Well, what would you do?

Months later, Yukiko is the face of the first pirate TV station filmed in space, with Mateo still behind the camera and the Cosmos, Serizawa, and Graham as science correspondents. After the latest episode wraps, the Cosmos present her with an invention of theirs: a kaiju communicator for humans. It’s not nearly as elegant as their bracelets, sort of resembling a psychotic dentist’s chair. (And they insist the tiara-like headpiece is essential.) Just before they turn it on, they inform Yukiko that she won’t be talking to Mothra, as she assumed, but Godzilla.

The credits roll before we hear what he says.

Dream Cast:

Yukiko Saegusa – Lyrica Okano

The Cosmos – Auli'i Cravalho (through Orphan Black-style trickery)

Dr. Ishiro Serizawa – Ken Watanabe

Dr. Vivienne Graham – Sally Hawkins

Mateo – Tyler Posey

Director Antonio Connor – Glenn Morshower

Clark Nelson – Steve Buscemi

Mason Weaver – Bette Midler

Admiral William Stenz – David Strathairn

Obligatory Post Credits-Scene: A scaled-down version of the Dimension Tide is tested at a Monarch black site. Though Serizawa and Graham’s exposé was successful in shuttering the project, Connor has cooked Monarch’s books just enough to fund this proof-of-concept device. Since no one has observed a black hole in person before, they think the trio of high-pitched cackles emanating from it are a little weird, but nothing to be worried about.

[rapecrisisdunedin]

Why being a woman cricket fan in New Zealand blows chunks

TRIGGER WARNING for discussions of a rape trial and the rape myths and victim-blaming used therein It finally happened. Scott Kuggeleijn has been called up to the Black Caps for their final test match against South Africa. I’ve been expecting this day to come, but believed – hoped - it wouldn’t be so soon. I feel ill. I am sad for every woman in this country who lives with the aftermath of sexual assault. For many survivors of rape and sexual abuse, this is just the latest reminder that if a man harms you he will not be held accountable by the justice system and will probably go on to enjoy a successful and illustrious career in his chosen field. And when that man is in a very public position, some of us endure the constant reminder of that, and of what happened to us, over and over again.

Far from ‘destroying a man’s reputation’, accusations of rape and sexual assault seem only to destroy the reputation of his accuser. In this case, the complainant’s testimony was attacked on the grounds that she wore a short skirt, a singlet and had been drinking. It is galling to have to remind people that none of those things make her a liar or are evidence of her consent. It is galling that lawyers are even allowed to peddle these kinds of arguments in rape trials. The fact that they are admissible and that the jury in the retrial gobbled it up like popcorn at the movies speaks volumes about New Zealand’s culture of misogyny. The list of caveats that apparently nullify a simple, clear ‘No,’ is longer than the Waikato river. I’m sick of hearing myself state what should be obvious – that what we wear or drink has nothing to do with our willingness to have sex - and I’m sick of writing it.

I was further stunned by the lack of legal competency exhibited by Judge David Wilson, QC, who seems to be unfamiliar with some of the finer points of consent law. Under New Zealand law, consent for sex cannot be given if it is coerced. His instruction to the jury, that consent given reluctantly is still consent, would seem to contradict that rule, and sends a disturbing message to women: that our bodily integrity is fair game to any man who is pushy and dominating enough. To any man who makes us feel afraid to say no. So much for our ‘freely, enthusiastically, continuously’ slogans. This ‘Honourable’ Judge with some letters beside his name believes he knows better: women don’t have to want sex, but we have to put up with it, including when we don’t want it.

Right, I’ve done enough hashing over the details of the two trials. Madeleine Holden[1] and Madeleine Chapman[2] have eloquently shed light on the use of rape myth, slut-shaming and victim-blaming in the complainant’s trials (and I type ‘complainant’s trials’ deliberately, because let’s not kid ourselves: she was on trial, not Kuggeleijn), and why that’s a problem. The subject of this piece is more personal to me: how to be a woman fan of cricket when the culture of cricket says you are inferior to men.

The answer is going to be different for every woman. I love this game to the point of obsession. I love cover drives and cut shots and pull shots; I love a screamer of a catch, I love well-executed yorkers, swing bowling, and the thrill of a run-out. I saw the matches and got the shirts. I’ve had selfies with BJ and Kane. Corey Anderson’s and Matt Henry’s autographs are among my prized possessions. My co-workers, family and friends eye me askance that I would book annual leave when there’s a test match down at the University Oval or up in Christchurch at Hagley. They all know one of my other passions is feminism, and perhaps that’s part of the side-eye: how does one reconcile these two seemingly disparate enthusiasms? I wonder that too. Today, with Kuggeleijn on the squad, I’m tearing my hair out with the wondering. Sure, my ‘fave’ sport is problematic, but I don’t – shouldn’t – have to justify or account for my love of it to anyone. Except myself. And I can’t even do that anymore: as long as this man is on the team, I will not be watching or supporting the Black Caps. I’ll probably even cheer if I hear of Australia beating them. Good. And I hope Australia sledge us and play dirty and bowl underarm to their hearts’ content.

This team does not deserve my support as a woman. New Zealand Cricket, its governing body, does not deserve my support. The selection of Scott Kuggeleijn is not just a sad anomaly in an otherwise equal-opportunities professional sport. It is a logical outgrowth of male supremacy in the sport as a whole. Here are some examples of cricket’s disdain for, and indifference to women I have noticed over my last year-and-a-half of cricket fandom.

· At time of writing, the White Ferns (the New Zealand women’s cricket team, currently ranked third in the world [3]) have 15 players under contract. Those contracts are worth a minimum of $20,000 and a maximum of $34,000 [4]. The Black Caps, meanwhile, have 21 players under contracts ranging in worth from $85,585 to $205,266 [5]. This isn’t a pay gap so much as a pay chasm. Even men on the provincial teams earn more than the White Ferns.

· Last year, the ICC opted to fly women cricketers economy to the T20 World Cup while the men flew business class. After public outcry, Cricket Australia upgraded the Southern Stars’ tickets to business, but New Zealand Cricket didn’t see fit to do the same for the White Ferns.

· Toilets. Really, they are an issue. In spite of the fact that women make up almost 50% of the crowd at matches, we warrant inferior bathroom facilities. The Basin Reserve has only a handful of toilets for women. Men have four massive toilet blocks. I kept getting confused and bumbling into the urinals when I was there last weekend, assuming that my loos would just be at the opposite end to the men’s. Not to be: the opposite end of the block is more men’s loos. Ladies go round the back. But at least I could see in them: at the University Oval in Dunedin, the lights in the women’s toilet block were kaput all summer, and were only repaired in time for the Black Caps vs South Africa test early in March. If you think I’m being pedantic by pointing this out, think again. If women are to feel welcome at cricket matches, the least the grounds can do is offer us adequate toilet facilities.

· Oh my God, nobody thought the Otago Sparks vs Northern Spirit game, at the Uni Oval on the day after New Years’ Day, was worth cleaning up rubbish for. It was my first women’s cricket match, and I’d been excited about it for weeks, but the embankments were significantly different from any of the Otago Volts games I’ve attended. The empty beer cans scattered every which way (from the Volts’ game the night before) did not give a laid back ambience. They were symbolic of how women’s cricket is viewed in this country: garbage.

· Last year New Zealand Cricket was the subject of an independent study into the health of women’s participation in cricket. The study reported that the body was failing to engage women at all levels [6]. Sir Richard Hadlee’s response was, if you will pardon my creative paraphrasing, ‘I’VE BEEN TELLING THEM THIS FOR DECADES WHY IS NO-ONE LISTENING OMFG.’[7] (Thanks Sir Richard).

What all this demonstrates is that the cricket pitch is by no means a level playing field. Quite the opposite: cricket is structured, above and below, by sexism. Women’s status as second-class citizens is entrenched at all levels: as umpires, as administrators, as fans, and as budding and established cricketers. And so I ask, sincerely, what has the male cricketing establishment done to be worthy of my support? To be clear, I support women in the game and behind the scenes, wholeheartedly. But New Zealand Cricket tells us, and shows us, time and again that women are in their eyes lesser beings. Scott Kuggeleijn’s promotion to international representative is just the most recent example of it, and although deeply hurtful, not even slightly surprising.

When NZC CEO David White blithely states that he respects the judicial process, it’s a cop out. There is plenty of documented evidence that the judicial process is a routine failure when it comes to sexual violence cases.[8] That’s why the Law Commission has made recommendations for numerous changes (most of which are being ignored).[9] Yes, Kuggeleijn was acquitted. And if you’re anything familiar with the reporting of the case and came away convinced that justice was served, that the complainant gave free and willing consent, and that Kuggeleijn is an upstanding citizen with a right-on attitude toward women, then I’m afraid I don’t know what to say to you.

We can take from all this that New Zealand Cricket’s self-proclaimed interest in inclusion and diversity is worth less than the paper it is written on.[10] Want to be perceived as egalitarian? It’s simple: you treat women equally. You don’t hold up as international role models men who by their own admission see women as walking targets.[11] And that’s the other thing at stake here: while NZC are tacitly telling women and girls they don’t give a proverbial about them, they’re sending an even more dangerous message to boys and men. Boys, especially, who look up to the Black Caps, not just for their sporting prowess, but for lessons on how to be men. What might those children and young men make of this? Probably that harmful sexual behaviour is no barrier to success in cricket. Treat women as you please, they are a means to an end, and at the end of the day if you leave someone traumatised, don’t worry about it because you’re one of the boys.

Did anyone ever wonder where the so-called ‘Roastbusters’, that group of teenaged boys who sexually assaulted intoxicated young women, bragged about it online, and were never brought to justice, learned to do what they did?[12]

That didn’t spring out of nowhere. The culture of misogyny is all around us. It’s thriving at New Zealand Cricket. As passionate as I am about cricket, I can’t support this team anymore. Until the Black Caps stand up against violence against women, I have no interest in being a fan. Until New Zealand Cricket makes a serious commitment to undoing its structural sexism, I have nothing but criticism for them.

[1] http://thespinoff.co.nz/society/17-08-2016/legal-lesson-we-still-somehow-havent-learned-no-meant-yes-is-not-a-rape-defence/

[2] http://thespinoff.co.nz/society/24-02-2017/were-you-saying-no-but-not-meaning-no-on-the-tactics-of-scott-kuggeleijns-lawyer/

[3] http://www.espncricinfo.com/rankings/content/page/211271.html

[4] http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/310984/white-ferns-salary-gap-reflects-revenue-new-zealand-cricket

[5] http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/79538819/pay-rise-for-top-nz-cricketers-with-backtoback-india-tours-to-boost-coffers

[6] http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/86264938/independent-study-calls-out-new-zealand-cricket-for-engagement-levels-with-women

[7] http://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/cricket/86294301/Sir-Richard-Hadlee-not-surprised-by-damning-results-of-study-into-women-and-cricket-in-New-Zealand

[8] McDonald, E. & Tinsley, Y. (2011) From “Real Rape” to Real Justice: Prosecuting Rape in New Zealand. Wellington: Victoria University Press.

[9] http://www.lawcom.govt.nz/sites/default/files/projectAvailableFormats/NZLC%20IP30.pdf

[10] http://www.blackcaps.co.nz/news-items/sport-unites-for-inclusivity-and-diversity

[11] http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11805426

[12] http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/10674764/Roast-Busters-case-No-charges-to-be-laid

[jessicakehoe]

Everything That Upset the Internet This Week

What is the web-o-sphere angry about this week? A global actress left off The Avengers top billing, a global actress included on the cover of Vogue and a pay-for-play elite education scheme. Here’s everything you need to know:

A College Admissions Scandal is Revealed

THE STORY: Earlier this week, federal prosecutors announced that dozens of wealthy individuals are face charges for taking part in a college bribery scheme. Actresses Lori Loughlin and Felicity Huffman are among the parents involved in the scandal, which involved cheating on standardized tests and faking athletic abilities to get children admitted into elite colleges.

THE REACTION:

This college admissions scandal really is a disgrace. Easily as bad as any recruiting scandal.

As if the rich and powerful didn’t have enough advantages already.

— Tony Massarotti (@TonyMassarotti) March 15, 2019

Wow this college admissions scandal… 😧 Imagine all the qualified students that worked their asses off and got screwed because of it pic.twitter.com/ITeg9KAVZP

— Katy (@lustrelux) March 13, 2019

this college scandal with laurie loughlin makes me so heated. U** is my top pick school and to know that despite all my achievements and aspirations there is a very real chance my spot could go to someone who's parents have more money and clout than me makes me outraged.

— stella 🦋 💚 (@krisatriss) March 12, 2019

RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE RAGE: Having watched Gossip Girl and Gilmore Girls, I always assumed this was how the college admission system worked for America’s most wealthy:

I guess I'm just honestly surprised that a scheme was even used/needed in this college admissions scandal involving Felicity Huffman and Lori Loughlin (and many more). I just always assumed that this was the scenario:#collegeadmissionsscandal pic.twitter.com/wn6ZvyCwBE

— notsoperfect (@notsoperfect) March 12, 2019

And then, of course, there’s the “legal” way that rich parents give their children an academic advantage: hire private tutors, send kids to prestigious feeder schools, receive legacy preference. However, when corner-cutting becomes blatant law-breaking, it’s easier for us to understand the lengths at which the elite are willing to go to maintain their privilege. And, when it’s framed in this way, it’s also easier for us to get angry about. Here’s hoping that the outrage creates a larger conversation about a broken system.

Danai Gurira is Left Off Avengers: Endgame Poster Top Billing

THE STORY: Marvel Studio’s released the official poster for Avengers: Endgame on Friday, along with the highly anticipated film’s first full-length trailer. 13 of the main actors who survived Infinity War—Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr. and Scarlett Johansson among them—were displayed on the originally released poster. Only 12 names, however, were credited in the top billing.

Actress Danai Gurira, who plays Okoye, a General of the Dora Milaje, in the Black Panther franchise, was the only face on the poster whose name appeared in the small, footnote credits.

THE REACTION:

leaving out danai gurira's name on the poster while bradley cooper's name is there i- https://t.co/KefStY3AoQ

— 𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙞 𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙖 (@astarwarstori) March 14, 2019

she is the only black woman on that poster, the highest profile post-snappening wakandan, a firm fan favorite, and freaking actual DANAI GURIRA to boot. put some respect on her name, damn.

— Bim Adewunmi (@bimadew) March 14, 2019

WE KNOW OKOYE ON THE POSTER IS TOKEN WAKANDAN REPRESENTATION BUT THE LEAST YOU CAN DO IS PUT DANAI GURIRA’S NAME UP TOP LIKE EVERYONE ELSE’S. PAY YOUR DIVERSITY TAX.

— Nichole 🍞🍯 (@tnwhiskeywoman) March 14, 2019

RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE RAGE: It didn’t take Marvel very long to re-release a rectified poster, with Gurira rightfully placed in top billing. That said, they didn’t exactly apologize. Instead, they gave a brief response on their Twitter: “She should have been up there all this time. Check out the official Marvel Studios’ #AvengersEndgame poster.”

I’m just hoping that this wasn’t a subtle sign that Okoye isn’t going to make very far into the film. And I’m really hoping that the rest of the Black Panther cast joins her on screen by the end of Endgame.

Scarlett Johansson “Transcends Borders” on New Vogue Cover

THE STORY: Above the tagline ’14 Countries, 14 Superstars: The Global Actors Who Know No Limits,’ Scarlett Johansson appears on the April cover of American Vogue alongside South Korean actress Doona Bae and Indian actress Deepika Padukone.

Johansson was featured in “Everything That Upset the Internet This Week” last year when she was cast as a trans man in the film Rub & Tug. The project was dropped, but the controversy around it created a larger conversation about the actress’ choice of characters: in 2017, Johnsson became the poster girl for Hollywood whitewashing when she played the title role in Ghost in the Shell, a film that was adapted from Japanese manga.

  THE REACTION:

Sorry but Scarlett Johansson shouldn’t be on this cover. The Vogue article was an extensive look about the barriers these other women have broken to gain international stardom and here’s Scarlett who filmed a movie in Japan once. 🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️ https://t.co/7L7UtWLXpD

— Amanah F. (@xAmanaFx) March 14, 2019

Including Scarlett Johansson on the cover is insulting to the other women. She has repeatedly stolen roles from WOC and the Transgender community. She has also failed sexual abuse survivors (Woody Allen's muse and lead). She only supported #metoo when it was convenient for her

— Megan (@AlphaOhMegan) March 14, 2019

scarlett johansson really is the most versatile actress of our time. here she is on the cover of vogue portraying 7 clones of herself! truly remarkable. https://t.co/hJfK9fOp3u

— war criminal (@abblien) March 14, 2019

RIGHTEOUSNESS OF THE RAGE: I understand why Vogue would think to include Johansson in this package of women around the world. She is, after all, one of the highest paid and most popular actresses in Hollywood right now — so it makes sense to me that they would invite her to be a part of this survey, especially with Avengers: Endgame being released next month.

The article was an opportunity for Johansson to address her controversial casting history, and it’s unfortunate that this doesn’t happen. Instead, she talked about how she “remembers being quite lonely” while filming Lost in Translation in  Tokyo. It’s also unfortunate that the controversy around Johansson has taken the spotlight away from the other 13 global talents featured. We promise we’re still paying attention: read more about Bollywood star Deepika Padukone here.

The post Everything That Upset the Internet This Week appeared first on FASHION Magazine.

Everything That Upset the Internet This Week published first on https://borboletabags.tumblr.com/

[trendingnewsb]

‘Good men’ don’t exist

Good men are a myth.

There are men who do good things. There are men who, by comparison to terrible men, seem pretty good. But categorizing and holding up certain men as unquestionably perfect doesn’t do us any good—especially if we want to reckon with why men behave badly, violently even.

If you need proof of how hero worship has failed us, just look at the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations hitting the mainstream news cycle (or really, just read through #MeToo on any social platform). The men being named aren’t just open secrets like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey. Women have come forward to say women’s activist Sen. Al Franken groped them. The face of journalistic integrity, Charlie Rose, was fired by CBS and PBS after eight women said he sexually harassed them. And then there’s Holocaust survivor and author of the book every child was taught to uphold as Great Literature, Elie Wiesel, who reportedly groped a young woman’s rear while taking a photo.

Fundamentally, these men were seen as good, and now that we’ve found out they are not, we don’t know what to make of their work that we admired. But maybe we wouldn’t be in this predicament if we didn’t assume these guys were solid people simply because of their known contributions. What if we didn’t come in with that assumption? What if we just accepted that good men are a myth?

Toxic masculinity muddies the good

When we used to think about men like Wiesel, Rose, or even George Takei, we looked at these men with childlike wonder. They were not just heroes; they could do no wrong. When was the last time Takei slipped up on Twitter? How could Rose exist as anything other than a journalistic legend? When men are good, they’re seen as powerful father figures that deserve our unconditional love and trust. Their public goodness clearly represents their moral character.

But as any fifth grader will tell you, character is built by what people do behind closed doors, not out in the open. And what we know about toxic masculinity suggests there are a lot of terrible things that happen at the hands of men behind closed doors.

One survey of college men revealed that 31.7 percent of respondents would engage in “intentions to force a woman to sexual intercourse” if the possibility arose; 13.6 percent had straightforward “intentions to rape a woman” if they could get away with it, HuffPost reports. And these are just the men who feel comfortable enough to answer truthfully.

It’s easy to see in more obvious unbalanced power dynamics, like producers handpicking actresses in the film industry, that men are given plenty of opportunities to “force a woman to sexual intercourse.” But this also happens in the power dynamics of simply being male vs. female—of being taught to get your way by all means necessary vs. being taught that standing up for yourself often gets you only punished further.

Statistics from the University of Michigan reveal that one in 12 college men have committed sexual acts that fit the legal criteria of rape, even though 84 percent don’t consider their actions to be sexual assault. In short, while not all men self-report an inclination to commit sexual assault, a sizable amount are eager to do so and have never considered what consent means or the consequences of their actions.

Surprise! The answer is that we do, and we must, regard all men as potential monsters to be feared. That's why we cross to the other side of the street at night, and why we sometimes obey when men say "Smile, honey!" We are always aware the alternative could be death. https://t.co/hvgT7c5GBa

— Monica Hesse (@MonicaHesse) November 20, 2017

In 2012, rapists turned to Reddit to explain why they rape women. Most men claimed they “didn’t understand what had happened” because they received mixed messages. Others blamed “blue balls.” Some simply saw women as objects. In many cases, attempted rapists just didn’t understand they were doing something wrong.

“I’m a good man,” one man said. “I have a wife and a couple of kids now and I’m a good father and husband. I’m a pretty moral guy. But I think the thing that has always stuck with me…is how close I came to actually doing it. If I hadn’t looked up at her face and seen what she was feeling, I might have continued .”

There’s a running theme here. In each story, the rapists (or attempted rapists) felt entitled to women’s bodies. Whether through “raging hormones” or “mixed messages,” men assumed women were supposed to be sexually available if men felt sexually aroused. Women were there to please men.

What we know about toxic masculinity explains a lot about why these sexual assaults happen. If you’re unfamiliar with the term, Dr. NerdLove calls toxic masculinity a “narrow and restrictive band of behavior, belief, and appearance” that forces men to become “emotionally repressed” and “sexually aggressive almost to the point of mindlessness.” And while toxic masculinity often pops up through predatory and misogynistic behavior, “good men” can act toxic in much smaller ways, too.

Entitlement to women, more often than not, comes down to violating everyday boundaries. Ever heard of manspreading? Whether in New York City’s subway system or international airlines, men across the world regularly take up too much space on public transit. Or worse, women are often forced to put up with men pressing their thighs, arms, butts, and fronts against our bodies in confined spaces.

Any woman who has ever worked in a male-dominated workplace is certainly more than familiar with mansplaining, where men condescendingly explain basic concepts to experienced women working in the field in question. It’s the same sort of unquestioned, unchecked entitlement that causes men to speak over women in meetings, at times even stealing their ideas and claiming them as their own. Astronomer and professor Nicole Gugliucci calls this “hepeating,” and it explains a lot the kind of environment in which sexual harassment is incubated. Women, again, aren’t seen as equals, but as accessories whose minds and bodies are owed to men.

My friends coined a word: hepeated. For when a woman suggests an idea and it's ignored, but then a guy says same thing and everyone loves it

— Nicole Gugliucci (@NoisyAstronomer) September 22, 2017

Entitlement, apathy, and sexual aggression all lead men to take advantage of women and treat them as nothing more than objects. And since toxic masculinity is a cultural dinosaur that’s learned and reinforced from childhood, practically every man has some level of toxic masculinity ingrained in them—whether it’s not standing up for women who’ve been hepeated or simply not registering that a woman may feel threatened by unsolicited DM or a male-dominated work environment.

Men don’t deserve unconditional trust

So why should women ever trust men? Whether at Disney or in Congress, PBS or Vice, the recent sexual harassment and assault allegations emerging across the U.S. prove that it’s hard to know who has “character” and who doesn’t. If a significant portion of men are capable of sexual assault, and nearly all men grapple with microaggressions against women on a regular basis, it’s obvious that giving men power and the immunity of “goodness” is a recipe for disaster.

The simplest, most everyday way men take advantage of women is by manipulating us until we unconditionally trust them. Innocence until proven guilty, right? Perhaps not.

The harassment and assault allegations sweeping the nation suggest men fundamentally (or just as likely, conveniently) don’t even understand what they’re doing wrong. All of which means they don’t deserve our trust unless they work for it. Because even when men don’t blatantly harass women, they still objectify us by acting like they deserve our ideas, careers, space, and attention. Powerful men are much more likely to face checks and balances from bystanders if we start being skeptical toward men on a regular basis. Sexual harassment and assault are less likely to be a threat to women if we admit that all men are implicated in the objectification and dismissal of women’s worth.

I am at the point where i seriously, sincerely wonder how all women don't regard all men as monsters to be constantly feared. the real world turns out to be a legit horror movie that I inhabited and knew nothing about.

— Farhad Manjoo (feat. Drake) (@fmanjoo) November 20, 2017

Ask women how often they walk to their cars with the sharp end of their key strategically pointing out between their knuckles.

— Liz Gumbinner (@Mom101) November 20, 2017

There are men who strive to do better and men who work to right their wrongs—and those men are commendable. But they still don’t deserve to be put on the “good” shelf, never to be thought of otherwise again. Because, in the end, no man is worth the risk of trusting them beyond a doubt.

Hero worship, along with the cult of personalities around “good men,” provide excuses for men who abuse women. No matter how talented a man is, a man who rapes is still a rapist. A man who “overlooks” women being harassed in his office is still a man contributing to the culture that says harassment is OK. Let’s stop calling out the “good men” and instead call out their bad actions so they understand no one is excused.

Read more: http://ift.tt/2A80DBn

from Viral News HQ http://ift.tt/2EaChGF via Viral News HQ

[duaneodavila]

Fall of the Masters

Appellate Squawk raised the first alarm.

James Levine is one of the greatest living conductors and musicians of our time. We know this because the Metropolitan Opera Orchestra, which usually gets up and leaves as soon as they’ve played the last note, would stay in the pit to join in the applause when Maestro Levine was the conductor, even back in the days before he had to conduct from a wheelchair.

You may not have heard of James Levine. He’s no Meghan Trainor or Chance the Rapper.

Now he’s been destroyed by accusations from four middle-aged males claiming that he ruined their lives by masturbating them decades ago when they were 16 and 17 years old. The Met responded by summarily canceling all his scheduled appearances.

There were no police reports, no prosecutions. There will be no chance to disprove the accusations, explain, rehabilitate his reputation. This is alleged to have happened decades ago, and that’s enough to summarily ruin a master. And another master.

The Boston Conservatory at Berklee has cut ties with a high-profile professor, well known in the city’s contemporary classical music scene, amid allegations of abusive behavior and sexual improprieties.

Eric Alexander Hewitt — a saxophonist, conductor, and gatekeeper to coveted performance berths for young musicians — was placed on leave during a Globe investigation into alleged sexual mistreatment of women at the conservatory and beyond.

And yet another master.

Peter Martins, the longtime leader of New York City Ballet, has been removed from teaching his weekly class at the School of American Ballet while the two organizations jointly investigate an accusation of sexual harassment against him.

The accusation against Mr. Martins, 71, was made in an anonymous letter, both organizations confirmed on Monday. Mr. Martins is the artistic director and chairman of the faculty of the ballet school. He has led City Ballet, the company founded by the famed choreographer George Balanchine, since the 1980s.

Whether any, or all, of these accusations are true is unknown. What exactly these accusations are isn’t entirely clear. But it doesn’t matter. They aren’t made within the paradigm of legal proceedings, and so aren’t subject to the rigors of scrutiny. the “niceties” of due process, burdens of proof or rules of evidence. The silence left behind by masters will be filled with ten thousand murdered adjectives of the sad victims who now leap on the pile to enjoy their moment of victimhood.

And who will brave the tears of the woke, the screams of “misogynist,” by questioning the “bravery” of these “survivors”? Everything we know as lawyers is lost here, and yet you not only lack the principle, the fortitude, to challenge this panic? We, who defend the accused, shed everything we’ve ever believed in. You cowards. You lack the guts to stand up to the mob.

Some cross between Rachel Maddow and Emma Goldman sounds like a good start.

In 2009, Dahlia Lithwick wrote that she needs a hero. Someone who smirked where thought should be, or threw bombs where reason failed. In 2017, Lithwick piled on, because she could with impunity, having enjoyed the benefits of her access while she remained silent, and now enjoying the benefits of being a victim.

Nothing like that happened to me. But perhaps it helps you understand why, even though he never put his mouth directly on mine or clasped my throat, his consistent way of greeting me—with a kiss on the cheek that always lasted a few seconds too long, in front of colleagues I respected if not revered, so prolonged that others noted it—was unwanted.

If it was unwanted, and that’s fine if true, then why didn’t she say no? At any time. Ever. Until now, after others came forward with tales of actual conduct rather than the “always lasted a few seconds too long” nonsense?

Kozinski forced us all into this mess with him. And still, I am aware as I write this that I should have found my footing, that the women who came up after me, and who spoke up, are manifestly braver than I was. I am further aware that my failure to speak up over the course of my career is part of the reason why it was possible for the women who came after me to be treated as disrespectfully as they were.

Bullshit. Lithwick could have said no anytime she wanted. Kozinski didn’t force her into this mess. All the words that follow reflect her effort to rationalize away her failure as a writer, a lawyer, a human being with the ability to make her own choices. But she buries her disingenuous lie in a contrived excuse.

Everybody knew. This is the problem with a system of “open secrets.” All the clerks and former clerks in Kozinski’s ambit knew and understood that you assumed the risk and accepted the responsibilities of secrecy. Once you acceded to the poker games and the movies and the ritualized sex talk, you helped give it cover and license. To sit at a table with Judge Kozinski was to suspend rules for how judges talk and behave. The swearing and the gleeful overt talk of sexuality wasn’t just part of the bargain of being around him. Our silence became tacit approval of that chambers’ gleeful rejection of the strictures of political correctness and of the social imperative to police oneself.

Does this “address” Lithwick’s personal courage, her “forced” silence then and bold fifth-tier proclamation of victimhood for suffering being stare raped by Kozinksi now? Or is this pathetic rationalization for failure when it happened so she could bask in the glory of being near a legendary judge? The joke, should the Koz fall, is that he will be replaced by Trump. It’s unlikely that Rachel Maddow will make the short list.

Whether maestros were awful, or as awful as the untested and unrebutted stories would have them, isn’t known, and will never be known. There won’t be trials and appeals. But the masters have fallen at the hands of those who enjoyed the benefits of their silence.

Now, when it’s safe to pile on, when they are assured of never being subject to scrutiny, when they can bask in their victimhood, they crawl out of the woodwork to shed their tears. At least Meghan Trainor will still be singing about her weight, even if White Christmas will never darken the airwaves again.

Copyright © 2007-2017 Simple Justice NY, LLC This feed is for personal, non-commercial and Newstex use only. The use of this feed anywhere else violates copyright. If this content is not in your news reader, it means the page you are viewing infringes copyright. (Digital Fingerprint: 51981395c77d7762065ca2c084b63e47) Fall of the Masters republished via Simple Justice

[trishgibsontx]

how I stay (practically) protected with my work

photo by Nelson N. Castillo

if it isn’t clear already, I maintain a distance from the “spiritual” and “healing” communities. my personal experience has gathered an awareness of profound mental health issues amongst some of the bandwagon “tribes” aka groups/circles/”leaders” and meetups in those communities. it is unfortunate, as yes, it would be great if mentally and otherwise sound people could all convene somewhere. but that just has not been my experience in those “communities”. hence, my patient base is primarily corporate or real-word oriented. or thriving broadway actors or film and television actors. but, very much real world all the same. the people I get to see are not only sound, grounded and for the most part typically without any mental health issues – they are more so thrivers versus survivors; yet at the same time they have been through so much spiritually and personally and professionally.

that said, so many people focus on the “how can I protect myself energetically” when I feel like the question should be “how can I protect myself practically“? the world and our awareness is not run on intangible awareness alone, it is run on red flags and base level mental health hallmarks that otherwise “spiritual” people will ignore if they are not well-versed in the actual human world. I have a diverse background spanning a career in finance dealing with C suites, corporate America across the board in multiple industries, and entertainment production. this real world experience has served me very well. I see so many people, never having had hands-on experience in that capacity, struggling and asking me how to “protect” themselves while doing their healing work on others. typically these people who ask this question have not navigated boiler room environments in the corporate world, or maybe they went to art or design school and that’s it because they are young, or maybe they have worked ONLY in creative environments without structure and their idea of healing is going to Burning Man. all of that alternative living is well and good, but it certainly doesn’t provide a whole lot of understanding as it relates to practically protecting oneself, as there is no 3d application for it. so, if your background is very different from mine, or you were just born on a palm tree in Malibu, or your social circle is not diverse and everyone around you is exactly like you, how do you venture out into the world to do healing work and stay protected?

well, again, if we haven’t been around the block and experienced a number of different walks in life, it is going to be more difficult to spot the MANY different characters in the world, and the many different maneuvers by which they operate. being able to spot and understand people from this perspective is KEY in “protection” (I don’t care how intuitive or “psychic” we think we are — that is often a major, major pitfall in and of itself, thinking we “know better”). no, I am not talking about energetic protection. that can be another blog post. in fact, I do write about that in a post under psychic attacks. what I want to talk about here is how to protect oneself in a practical fashion, and how I stay protected in this way (nevermind the Harry Potter side of life, the undercurrents or matrix of energy and so forth!). here, in a nutshell, is how I stay protected:

I have a wonderful clinical collaborator/sounding board with decades of clinical psychoanalyst experience to support me. this person has seen. it. all. I consult with this person regularly, for feedback and confirmation on any case that pops up for me that may show a base level red flag. all of my work in my private practice is confidential, and I do not share names with the clinician. I do, however, see how my gut level knowing and understanding of a human archetype is growing faster and faster as we occasionally compare particular notes. you see, I have my approach — which explains itself in a slightly more intangible and mystical and wordy fashion — and my clinical sounding board has hers. it is a beautiful blending of both worlds. so, how does this protect me?

it is incredibly important if we are not a trained clinician, yet we are doing any kind of healing work which includes intense and prolonged dialogue, to have a trained support system in place in the event another individual tries to invade our psychic or psychological space. that space bleeds into ALL other spaces: not only cognitively but emotionally, spiritually, and of course physically. even trained clinicians and psychoanalysts have their support system, as they are at high risk for being manipulated by those with sociopathic qualities. sociopaths LOVE therapists and healers in general. they feel like it is the ULTIMATE conquest! this is why we see movies and tv shows about therapists who are either seduced or manipulated — from a psychological starting point only, that’s all it takes — and it’s a whole STORY. fortunately, I don’t have a story. I always see the flags nearly immediately, and I withdraw even more quickly. that said, I do need to protect myself…

I have only had to bounce a few situations/dynamics off of my supportive clinician. though we talk about many other things as well. when it comes to specific cases or dynamics of interest to me, I don’t even need to give this clinician age or gender most of the time — and within seconds, they are rattling off an entire diagnosis and scenario that lines up exactly with my gut intuition. we may have different languages for expressing what we see, but the line-up is incredible. I protect myself by having someone who is older than me and more experienced with mental illness and various psych disorders, to support me if I ever feel confused. by the way, if we feel confused by someone, we are often dealing with a mentally ill individual. in addition, I am fortunate, because I have never (knock on wood) had an issue of transference come up in any of my sessions, where I confuse a patient with someone from my past. I made a clear and distinct decision not to begin doing what I do, publicly, until my 30s and until I had worked through all of my “past” stuff to the point where it absolutely will not show up and confuse me in a session. I KNEW myself, first. this also makes it much simpler when I have a question or concern and bring it to my clinician. there is no “working through” anything, relative to a particular scenario as I might otherwise confuse with something from my life.

there are a number of young women whom I have helped begin their healing practices. some as young as 20. they haven’t even gotten close to the “real world” yet. though they are precocious and ahead of their time in other ways. I don’t mentor their individual cases nor would I. but, my suggestion is to 1) get your own psychotherapist or psychoanalyst to continue working through YOUR stuff and 2) find a seasoned (not a 30 year old) psychoanalyst who is adept at assessing and concluding personality disorders and mental illness, should you ever find yourself in a situation that does not feel right. this has happened to me, in the past, only a handful of times. just a handful, in the past near decade. that is a blessing. but, when I needed the support, I really needed it. make sure you can go to this person, if not your own therapist, to assist you with any confusing or difficult cases.

when we work in a healing/therapeutic (any kind of therapeutic modality) capacity, we are targets for the soulless. this is a given. they can target us in many, many different ways. that is why it has been important to me, given the fact that cognitive discussion and advising is 90% of what I offer through my work, that I have a proper team in place as a sounding board. years ago when I could not even afford a therapist, I would go to Alanon or any free programs to support me. then, I got a therapist. then, I found a clinician to support me when I had to deal with crazies and I missed the “signs” (there are always signs, p.s.). then, I got a gatekeeper and a full-time wonderful ivy league lawyer who specializes in medicine, and so on. so that I am always protected in this real-world way. this is more important than being “energetically” protected with some magic stone or whatever. though I do love magic stones, and I do certainly understand the underbelly of energetic travel! I do understand how people have tried and do try to “wear” me, take on my persona and aspects of me and live their life while I feel drained! but let’s be real, first. let’s get our ducks in a row so that we can be clear on what is actually happening on a fundamental level, first and foremost. then we can deal with the “energetic” elements clearly and effectively.

I stay protected with the team that I have in place, the team that I built, the team that I make myself vulnerable to every day or week. I started this team with no funds, when I had absolutely nothing. and sometimes the initial team failed me miserably and I felt the world was against me. but I just kept going, refining the team. and it became more and more solid. and now, with that growth, my practice has grown. and my practice continues to grow my team. each day that I learn “I don’t have to do it all alone”, I expand. and now I feel “safe” and strong and “protected” enough to take on major cases that I never imagined I would take on. and so I take them on. and they rock my spiritual world. and they actually reinforce how safe and protected I am. they would be there, they have been there, they are there, like a swift karate chop across the board in terms of whatever I could need legally, psychologically, logistically, creatively and even personally. bottom line: we have to be able to navigate the real world in order to protect ourselves.

The post how I stay (practically) protected with my work appeared first on The Medical Intuitive Blog: Energy Medicine & Reiki Therapy By Elaine™.

from Trisha Gibson http://www.themedicalintuitiveblog.com/2017/08/25/stay-practically-protected-work/

[yesweweresoldiers]

Lucas Morel on Teaching Colson Whitehead’s “The Underground Railroad”

Colson Whitehead’s novel The Underground Railroad, which won the 2016 National Book Award for fiction and the 2017 Pulitzer Prize, presents teachers of American history and literature an opportunity to immerse students in the harsh reality of slavery, but it also presents pedagogical challenges. The Pulitzer committee called the novel “a smart melding of realism and allegory that combines the violence of slavery and the drama of escape in a myth that speaks to contemporary America.” Not an ordinary historical novel—some have called it an example of “magical realism”—it aims at symbolic rather than literal historical truth. Whitehead invents an actual subterranean railroad, with a variety of trains, train stops, and conductors, to dramatize the varied and threatening social terrain an escaping slave had to cross before attaining freedom. This is only one of many liberties Whitehead takes with history as he tells the story of Cora, a young woman fleeing a Georgia plantation with a savagely cruel owner.

Professor Lucas Morel taught the novel to students at Washington and Lee last fall. We asked him about guiding students through the fantasy aspects of the novel toward the historical reality it depicts.

We expect historical novelists to vividly evoke a time period. Whitehead seems to lift incidents and trends from across three centuries and transplant them all into one decade. Why does Whitehead depart from fact in this way?

Historical novelists face a problem. The closer the history depicted is to the facts, the greater the challenge to keep the reader suspended in his disbelief and to let the plot, characters and dialogue do their work. Instead of just following the story, the reader wonders if this or that episode really happened.  (Just as with Spielberg’s Lincoln movie, in which Daniel Day Lewis acted his way to a record 3rd Academy award for Best Actor, every historian is asked, “Did Lincoln really say that?”)  The reader begins to treat the novel as a documentary rather than a tale that uses a mixture of fact and fiction to tell a larger truth. Colson Whitehead actually has a character say, “Sometimes a useful delusion is better than a useless truth.” No clearer statement of the grand aim of his novel could be made!  This remark occurs near the end of the book, as if to answer an objection in the mind of the reader who knows the story has played fast and loose with American history. It’s just one of several heavy-handed statements put in the mouths of characters to make sure the reader gets a lesson Whitehead wants them to learn. These statements depart from the usual rule of fiction-writing: “Show, don’t tell.” Still, Whitehead’s novel—even though I disagree with some of its teachings—raises questions about such important issues in American history and political development that I believe it’s worth reading.

Regarding his compression into a decade historical events and incidents that actually took place across a few centuries, I’m guessing Whitehead wanted to deal with race and America in one fell literary swoop.  Race still matters, still infects how Americans relate to one other socially and especially politically, even after the Emancipation Proclamation, the end of the Civil War and the ratification of the 13th-15th Amendments, not to mention the achievements of the modern Civil Rights Movement and the election (and re-election) of a black president. Whitehead must think that it needs to remain a subject of discussion that extends beyond the domain of politicians.  He does present events of which most Americans are probably not aware.  One wonders whether his readers will be shocked more by his depictions of these events or by the subsequent discovery that they actually occurred!

Does this work as a story?  For the most part, yes.  That’s due to Whitehead’s craft, e.g., the way he gets the reader to invest in his protagonist, Cora, who attempts to escape from a plantation through an actual underground railroad—the greatest conceit of the book, but one I also believe works.  It invites discussion and reflection upon the nature of the American regime and how an individual or society can move from expressing mere will, self-interest, and force to pursuing justice, self-government, and civilization.  The great political question of right versus might is a central theme of the novel.  Although I disagree with Whitehead’s rendering of the meaning and significance of America and her development as a nation, he does prompt readers to ponder these things.

How might teachers deal with the historical background of the novel?

In interviews, Whitehead indicates he researched extensively American slavery and the slave trade. He wouldn’t need to draw much from outside the long American experience with slavery and accounts of what the worst enslavers and overseers did to maintain control over large numbers of slaves.  One particularly garish event of torture in the beginning of the novel struck me as almost beyond credulity. But perhaps the author meant to convey that, because the law and social practice sided with the enslaving class, there was little that a master could not do when it came to enforcing his will. It’s true that slave owners occasionally set ghastly examples to ensure the strict obedience of the rest of their slaves. Whitehead depicts a contest between the brutalization of human beings and the spirit of freedom, showing how the humanity of the enslaved expressed itself in the most trying situations, even in the pecking order slaves imposed upon themselves—a semblance of culture—and in Cora’s resistance to injustice even in the slaves’ internal affairs.

Whitehead gives the devil his due, that’s for sure, but he also shows the tremendous ingenuity, improvisation, and agency of human beings subject to the near-absolute control of legal masters.  Here he has learned from Ralph Ellison’s Invisible Man, which illustrates how those treated as second-class citizens and considered inferior by nature display their humanity in ways that are misunderstood or simply overlooked by those in power. For example, Ellison’s invisible man is able to power 1,369 light bulbs in his apartment without the Monopolated Light and Power Company tracing that current drain to his hole in the ground! In a very similar way, Whitehead shows us an incredible underground railroad, an engineering feat accomplished apparently by the black slaves themselves. In this Whitehead asks the question, “Has this country been built by hands and minds that we don’t have a clue about—or deliberately left out of our histories?” And this work is heroic. As free human beings, they risked their lives to build something they themselves may never have gotten the chance to use.

The novel should motivate those unfamiliar with the history of race in America to learn more about its role in our social and political development. In classrooms using the book, students might research and report on incidents in the novel that appear historical. It would take a student only about 8 seconds on the Internet to discover that the Underground Railroad was not a literal railroad, and then he could research what it actually was. Other students might research incidents that did occur in our past yet not in such a short space of time.  A reminder at the outset that Whitehead’s novel is a work of fiction would be in order, and that by working upon our imaginations, the author seeks to engage us in important questions regarding the human condition—and how our founding and development as a nation may have reflected, improved, or retarded that condition.

The novel prompts us to ask: what would it take for Cora not simply to flee from oppression but also to find safety, security, and prosperity for herself and those she loves? Is true community possible? What are its requirements, and what are obstacles to it? And can these thrive generation over generation?  Lincoln addressed these questions pretty much throughout his public career, from his Lyceum Address of 1838 to his most famous speech at Gettysburg.

By the end of Whitehead’s novel, Cora seems the lone survivor of the many who sought freedom and the few who tried to help them gain it. Does Whitehead think you have to be a person of extraordinary character and will to free yourself from an unjust political and social system?

Only a small percentage of slaves attempted to escape, and fewer were successful in the attempt. (Resistance most likely took other forms.) Whitehead illustrates the tremendous difficulty of escape, especially for those furthest from a free state border. In part, he’s countering those who, imagining that they themselves would never have allowed themselves to become enslaved or to remain in slavery, claim that African American slaves were somehow content with their misery (this seems a veiled form of white supremacy, analogous to those who wonder why Jews did not do more to avoid or escape their plight under Nazi Germany, a question Hannah Arendt discussed in her controversial book, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil).

Still, I think Whitehead fails to offer a completely honest account of America.  While illustrating the ways slavery contradicts America’s highest principles, he gives short shrift to the power of those principles and the individuals of various races who struggled—ultimately successfully—to bring those principles to bear on America’s development as a nation, both politically and socially.

I keep using the word “development” because America is and remains a work in progress—and this not because its principles are flawed or its people any more deficient or vicious than those of any other nation.  As President Bill Clinton remarked in his First Inaugural Address, “There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured with what is right in America.” Yet for Whitehead, the distinctive aspects of America are its flaws. The character Lander, an orator, writer, and escaped slave residing on Valentine Farm in Indiana (a former slave state), seems to speak for Whitehead in observing that “America, too, is a delusion, the grandest one of all. . . . This nation shouldn’t exist, if there is any justice in the world, for its foundations are murder, theft, and cruelty.”  He then adds, “Yet here we are,” suggesting that good happens despite America, not because of it.

For me, the most redeeming feature of America is the clearest expression of its noblest ideals and aspirations: the Declaration of Independence.  This document appears twice in the novel, first as the memorized speech of a slave (Michael) who gets trotted out to amuse the guests of the vicious slave-owner Terrance Randall. Later, a more favorable rendering of the Declaration’s principles occurs on the Valentine Farm, where Cora finds sanctuary.  But even here, its principal truths, declared to be “self-evident,” are not taken as such, but rather likened to “a map”: “You trust that it’s right, but you only know by going out and testing it yourself.”  In the end, Whitehead seems to say that freedom is what you make of it. President Obama liked to say, “that while these truths may be self-evident, they’ve never been self-executing” and “while freedom is a gift from God, it must be secured by His people here on Earth.”

But what test does Whitehead envision to prove the truth of the Declaration’s claims?  How would one refute the argument made by Ridgeway, the novel’s slave-catcher par excellence and Cora’s nemesis, that freedom is simply the will of the stronger?  “The American imperative,” Ridgeway calls it, declaring, “If the white man wasn’t destined to take this new world, he wouldn’t own it now. Here was the true Great Spirit, the divine thread connecting all human endeavor—if you can keep it, it is yours. Your property, slave or continent.”

Would you say Ridgeway represents one pole of American thinking about liberty: that it resides in a particular people’s “manifest destiny” —or that free government is simply a matter of “popular sovereignty”?

That view has been maintained by Stephen Douglass and by Southern Confederates, but it is not the view expressed at our founding. I see equality and liberty as in a way the same thing. According to the Declaration, to speak of liberty is to speak of that which we possess equally. I have no more and no less liberty than you do—that’s the meaning of American equality. The potential conflict is between equality and consent. We possess equality and liberty by endowment from our Creator, or by nature. What we are not given is the security to enjoy and exercise them. That’s where human beings have to do their work. It’s as if God says, “Here’s liberty; good luck with that!” Jefferson reflects the Lockean view: people first understand what they have by God’s endowment or by nature, then they realize they are vulnerable without a way to protect this. That’s why it is also self-evident “that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from consent of the governed.”

Jefferson’s slaves had the same amount of liberties naturally as he did, yet they were being deprived by law and practice of the free exercise of it. The question is, did the Founders set us on a course where the structures of society, as well as the ideals, could work together so that over time, as Lincoln said, we could press into reality that which was true but wasn’t being respected? American political development is a long effort to get people to channel their consent to the equal protection of what we all possess.

  from We the Teachers Blog http://ift.tt/2rxxhbP via IFTTT

[trendingnewsb]

‘Good men’ don’t exist

Good men are a myth.

There are men who do good things. There are men who, by comparison to terrible men, seem pretty good. But categorizing and holding up certain men as unquestionably perfect doesn’t do us any good—especially if we want to reckon with why men behave badly, violently even.

If you need proof of how hero worship has failed us, just look at the recent wave of sexual harassment allegations hitting the mainstream news cycle (or really, just read through #MeToo on any social platform). The men being named aren’t just open secrets like Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey. Women have come forward to say women’s activist Sen. Al Franken groped them. The face of journalistic integrity, Charlie Rose, was fired by CBS and PBS after eight women said he sexually harassed them. And then there’s Holocaust survivor and author of the book every child was taught to uphold as Great Literature, Elie Wiesel, who reportedly groped a young woman’s rear while taking a photo.

Fundamentally, these men were seen as good, and now that we’ve found out they are not, we don’t know what to make of their work that we admired. But maybe we wouldn’t be in this predicament if we didn’t assume these guys were solid people simply because of their known contributions. What if we didn’t come in with that assumption? What if we just accepted that good men are a myth?

Toxic masculinity muddies the good

When we used to think about men like Wiesel, Rose, or even George Takei, we looked at these men with childlike wonder. They were not just heroes; they could do no wrong. When was the last time Takei slipped up on Twitter? How could Rose exist as anything other than a journalistic legend? When men are good, they’re seen as powerful father figures that deserve our unconditional love and trust. Their public goodness clearly represents their moral character.

But as any fifth grader will tell you, character is built by what people do behind closed doors, not out in the open. And what we know about toxic masculinity suggests there are a lot of terrible things that happen at the hands of men behind closed doors.

One survey of college men revealed that 31.7 percent of respondents would engage in “intentions to force a woman to sexual intercourse” if the possibility arose; 13.6 percent had straightforward “intentions to rape a woman” if they could get away with it, HuffPost reports. And these are just the men who feel comfortable enough to answer truthfully.

It’s easy to see in more obvious unbalanced power dynamics, like producers handpicking actresses in the film industry, that men are given plenty of opportunities to “force a woman to sexual intercourse.” But this also happens in the power dynamics of simply being male vs. female—of being taught to get your way by all means necessary vs. being taught that standing up for yourself often gets you only punished further.

Statistics from the University of Michigan reveal that one in 12 college men have committed sexual acts that fit the legal criteria of rape, even though 84 percent don’t consider their actions to be sexual assault. In short, while not all men self-report an inclination to commit sexual assault, a sizable amount are eager to do so and have never considered what consent means or the consequences of their actions.

Surprise! The answer is that we do, and we must, regard all men as potential monsters to be feared. That's why we cross to the other side of the street at night, and why we sometimes obey when men say "Smile, honey!" We are always aware the alternative could be death. https://t.co/hvgT7c5GBa

— Monica Hesse (@MonicaHesse) November 20, 2017

In 2012, rapists turned to Reddit to explain why they rape women. Most men claimed they “didn’t understand what had happened” because they received mixed messages. Others blamed “blue balls.” Some simply saw women as objects. In many cases, attempted rapists just didn’t understand they were doing something wrong.

“I’m a good man,” one man said. “I have a wife and a couple of kids now and I’m a good father and husband. I’m a pretty moral guy. But I think the thing that has always stuck with me…is how close I came to actually doing it. If I hadn’t looked up at her face and seen what she was feeling, I might have continued .”

There’s a running theme here. In each story, the rapists (or attempted rapists) felt entitled to women’s bodies. Whether through “raging hormones” or “mixed messages,” men assumed women were supposed to be sexually available if men felt sexually aroused. Women were there to please men.

What we know about toxic masculinity explains a lot about why these sexual assaults happen. If you’re unfamiliar with the term, Dr. NerdLove calls toxic masculinity a “narrow and restrictive band of behavior, belief, and appearance” that forces men to become “emotionally repressed” and “sexually aggressive almost to the point of mindlessness.” And while toxic masculinity often pops up through predatory and misogynistic behavior, “good men” can act toxic in much smaller ways, too.

Entitlement to women, more often than not, comes down to violating everyday boundaries. Ever heard of manspreading? Whether in New York City’s subway system or international airlines, men across the world regularly take up too much space on public transit. Or worse, women are often forced to put up with men pressing their thighs, arms, butts, and fronts against our bodies in confined spaces.

Any woman who has ever worked in a male-dominated workplace is certainly more than familiar with mansplaining, where men condescendingly explain basic concepts to experienced women working in the field in question. It’s the same sort of unquestioned, unchecked entitlement that causes men to speak over women in meetings, at times even stealing their ideas and claiming them as their own. Astronomer and professor Nicole Gugliucci calls this “hepeating,” and it explains a lot the kind of environment in which sexual harassment is incubated. Women, again, aren’t seen as equals, but as accessories whose minds and bodies are owed to men.

My friends coined a word: hepeated. For when a woman suggests an idea and it's ignored, but then a guy says same thing and everyone loves it

— Nicole Gugliucci (@NoisyAstronomer) September 22, 2017

Entitlement, apathy, and sexual aggression all lead men to take advantage of women and treat them as nothing more than objects. And since toxic masculinity is a cultural dinosaur that’s learned and reinforced from childhood, practically every man has some level of toxic masculinity ingrained in them—whether it’s not standing up for women who’ve been hepeated or simply not registering that a woman may feel threatened by unsolicited DM or a male-dominated work environment.

Men don’t deserve unconditional trust

So why should women ever trust men? Whether at Disney or in Congress, PBS or Vice, the recent sexual harassment and assault allegations emerging across the U.S. prove that it’s hard to know who has “character” and who doesn’t. If a significant portion of men are capable of sexual assault, and nearly all men grapple with microaggressions against women on a regular basis, it’s obvious that giving men power and the immunity of “goodness” is a recipe for disaster.

The simplest, most everyday way men take advantage of women is by manipulating us until we unconditionally trust them. Innocence until proven guilty, right? Perhaps not.

The harassment and assault allegations sweeping the nation suggest men fundamentally (or just as likely, conveniently) don’t even understand what they’re doing wrong. All of which means they don’t deserve our trust unless they work for it. Because even when men don’t blatantly harass women, they still objectify us by acting like they deserve our ideas, careers, space, and attention. Powerful men are much more likely to face checks and balances from bystanders if we start being skeptical toward men on a regular basis. Sexual harassment and assault are less likely to be a threat to women if we admit that all men are implicated in the objectification and dismissal of women’s worth.

I am at the point where i seriously, sincerely wonder how all women don't regard all men as monsters to be constantly feared. the real world turns out to be a legit horror movie that I inhabited and knew nothing about.

— Farhad Manjoo (feat. Drake) (@fmanjoo) November 20, 2017

Ask women how often they walk to their cars with the sharp end of their key strategically pointing out between their knuckles.

— Liz Gumbinner (@Mom101) November 20, 2017

There are men who strive to do better and men who work to right their wrongs—and those men are commendable. But they still don’t deserve to be put on the “good” shelf, never to be thought of otherwise again. Because, in the end, no man is worth the risk of trusting them beyond a doubt.

Hero worship, along with the cult of personalities around “good men,” provide excuses for men who abuse women. No matter how talented a man is, a man who rapes is still a rapist. A man who “overlooks” women being harassed in his office is still a man contributing to the culture that says harassment is OK. Let’s stop calling out the “good men” and instead call out their bad actions so they understand no one is excused.

Read more: http://ift.tt/2A80DBn

from Viral News HQ http://ift.tt/2EaChGF via Viral News HQ