Why Both Men and Women Need Better Education on Sexual Harassment

The number of people exposed for sexual harassment and assault is increasing, and sex-related reports are everywhere in the media , with a wide range of opinions on the related incidents.

It is an educational movement
Individual cases vary greatly, and it is impossible to generalize. Moreover, it is very likely out of a mentality that could be called “womanly compassion” that I am more concerned with “crime” than “criminal person”.

If I had to judge the #MeToo movement as “good” or “bad ,” I would say it’s a good thing. It’s an educational movement; for men, it teaches them restraint and respect; for women (and some gay men), it teaches them self-protection, especially to clearly say no or even call the police as soon as possible. The fact that many of the men “caught” in this movement are actually frontline activists shows how scarce and necessary this kind of education is—especially in China.
Preferring the legal path
Okay, now that we’ve covered the politically correct aspects, let’s move on to the politically incorrect ones. As a movement, #MeToo also has aspects I don’t like. Simply put, I inherently dislike loud, sensationalist propaganda and big-character posters.

Why do I prefer the legal path? Because the spirit of the rule of law is inherently individualistic—it emphasizes case-by-case analysis, even analyzing different charges against the same person individually, procedural justice, confrontation and evidence presentation by both parties, the presumption of innocence in criminal matters, and the principle of proportionality in sentencing … I appreciate the carefulness inherent in the spirit of the law. While sexual assault can inflict endless harm and suffering on victims, the label of “sexual harasser” can also be devastating for a man.

The “Great Leap Forward” and “Big-Character Posters” were collective, remote, and carnival-like public trials. Putting aside other issues, I’m perplexed by how #MeToo lumps together offenses of vastly different natures. It downplays and weakens truly serious crimes while infinitely elevating lesser offenses like “frivolity” and “presumptuousness.”
Those who are universally condemned deserve the most procedural justice.
Some people say, “Who did #MeToo target wrongly? There’s no such thing as a wrongful conviction, so there’s no need to worry about collateral damage.” I don’t entirely agree.
Firstly, there are indeed many cases in the history of sexual harassment accusations that could very well be false accusations. The Columbia University “mattress girl” rape case failed to prove the man’s guilt in at least two investigations. The Woody Allen harassment case involving his adopted daughter remains shrouded in mystery. The Tang Lanlan case, which recently sparked widespread debate, is similarly perplexing, and among the dozens of people she accused, her grandfather died under mysterious circumstances in detention . If one has any doubts about the possibility of wrongful accusations, a simple search for “false rape claim” will reveal countless examples.

Furthermore, what exactly constitutes “hit rate”? Catching a “major villain” certainly counts as a “hit,” but are all the charges against that “major villain” “hit”? The rule of law requires us to take every crime seriously. The more universally condemned someone, the more procedural justice is needed, but the struggle model of mass criticism and big-character posters cannot guarantee this procedural justice.
Is the “presumption of innocence” principle applicable to public opinion?
Some friends say that the “presumption of innocence” does not apply to public opinion, and I don’t entirely agree. Even if we cannot use the “presumption of innocence” principle in public opinion, we should at least use the “presumption of guilt based on strong evidence” principle, rather than jumping directly to the “presumption of guilt” principle.

For example, cross-testimony between different real-name witnesses is a strong piece of evidence. Unfortunately, I feel that the atmosphere recently is increasingly moving towards the principle of “accusation equals conviction”—as long as one person has accused another, the “defendant’s” name will be repeatedly brought up and used against them.
Some people say that even if you were wrongly accused, you can fight back and prove your innocence. This is a rather simplistic statement. Anyone familiar with the patterns of online communication knows that lies always spread much more widely and quickly than refutations; proving innocence often only makes things worse; believers will always believe, and non-believers will always disbelieve … All of this makes the idea of “proving innocence” seem futile.
Sexual harassment is often a power structure problem.
I agree with many friends who have said that sexual harassment is often a power structure issue. When a man possesses power and resources that are completely disproportionate to those of a woman (or a gay man), the woman is often powerless to resist, or the cost of resistance is too high. This is one of the main reasons why sexual harassment is so prevalent.

This is why I believe that the sexual harassment currently exposed is just the tip of the iceberg. Why are the intellectual, public welfare, cultural, and media circles the most exposed to sexual harassment? It’s not, as some people say, because men in these fields are particularly evil, but precisely because the power structure in these fields is relatively level, and the exposure of such acts doesn’t impose a heavy price on these girls.
The circumstances of those who are “violated” vary greatly.
However, I do not agree with the unquestionable, unified narrative structure of “evil, powerful men + innocent, vulnerable women” in the #MeToo movement. Just as sexual assaulters are diverse, so are the circumstances of those “violated.” Yes, it’s a power structure issue, but you can’t simultaneously conform to and participate in that power structure while resisting it. Saying no loudly, clearly, and promptly, even at a cost, is the fundamental mechanism to reverse the rules of the game.

Another fundamental motivation for sexual assault is the belittling and objectification of women by patriarchal culture. Similarly, I don’t believe that only men should be held responsible for the belittling and objectification of women. Women are often passive or even active participants in this objectification and belittling.
By the way, I disagree with the notion that no matter what a woman says, does, or wears, a man has no right to misunderstand her intentions. Let’s be realistic; humans are signal-driven beings.
About #meToo, about “catch-up lessons”
Regarding #MeToo, I particularly agree with a friend’s use of the term “make-up lessons.” Men need to learn about respect and self-discipline, while women need to learn about self-protection. Of course, tolerance should not include actual rape or repeated sexual assault. I don’t want to see male-female relationships characterized only by vigilance and devoid of warmth, just as I don’t want to see a feminism that only emphasizes rights and denies responsibility.

Of course, women’s tolerance is predicated on men’s self-reflection. If the offender doesn’t reflect on their actions, doesn’t apologize, or even turns the tables, expecting women to be tolerant is clearly a joke. Therefore, if the offense is exposed and true, issue a public apology. Even if it hasn’t been exposed, sincerely reflect on your actions, starting today.

share in github.com.

CLIMAGOHI “Cat Ear” Dual-Tip Vibrating Massager ZY-SC11047

Rated 4.63 out of 5 based on 104 customer ratings

(104 customer reviews)

[SULTRYCARE] “Cat Ear” Dual-Tip Body Massager – 10-Frequency Powerful Vibration – Body-Safe Silicone + ABS – Ergonomic Design – ZY-SC11047

Add to wishlist

SKU: ZY-SC11047

分类： Vibrator

标签：ZY-SC11047

Why Both Men and Women Need Better Education on Sexual Harassment