An old Jewish tale.
Two merchants have a dispute.
They go the the rabbi to arbitrate.
Come merchant 1 and details his side of events, the rabbi listens and nods: "You are right"
His opposite side come in with his perspective, and the rabbi goes "you are right"
The rabbi's wife is sitting there listening to the whole thing and she can't stand it:
What idiocy is this? he is right, and he is right too! this makes no sense.
The rabbi - calmly - "You are absolutely right"
This joke is quite descriptive of the #MeToo controversy.
Can both be right?
The women listing their various grievances and experiences AND the men saying that this is wierd extremism?
Yes, both are right.
How could that be?
We have many women that report on copious amounts of harassments / rape etc.
We have numerous men that listen to it dubiously. "This can't be true" they say with utter conviction.
The solution is statistical and very simple.
Repeated offenders.
Let's assume that we have 10 out of 100 men that are prolific sexual offenders.
He will harass a lot, rape if an opportunity arises, and generally engage in various unsavory behaviors towards women.
The other 90, are the average Joe. They might wink at a woman at the coffee shop, or even try to talk to her if they think she is looking back. They sometimes go to dates, and occasionally things aren't super clear. So they might on rate occasion displease a woman, but usually without malice of ill intent.
The women will suffer a lot. Few harassers are enough to terrorise many women.
A noxious men can inconvenience 20 women a day.
Average Joe will start talking to a woman once in awhile, but not in industrial numbers.
The average Joe looking at a woman to see if she is looking back, might not even be noticed by her. And if he is polite enough, she might not feel discomfort.
But the calouss one will be well remembered.
The number of times a woman is inappropriately approached might be very high. Even if most men will not harass.
Why would the average men believe the #MeToo stories? If he and his close friends never behave this way, how could he believe the stories?
Here comes the mix up of harassment and awkward encounters.
The average Joe has had his numbers of misunderstandings with women. Not malicious. usually not damaging either. But discomfiting nevertheless.
Average Joe will assume that #MeToo is about those subtle misunderstanding. And gesture wrongly comprehended. The mutually drunk encounter. The bad date. You name it.
Extreme feminists will help in this error.
They will drag real women suffering into the gray dating mishaps. They will say
"YES! you see this traumatised woman? She suffered from people like you that have not filled in the 200 page consent form before touching the lady finger"
"It is all insensitive gross misogynists like you all. Yes all men and you are not exempt"
Causing derision and disbelief. Making rape victims harder to believe. And putting off men from listening.
But the suffering is common and real. It just comes from a noxious minority.
PS. The implications for policy and public discourse are many. The reader is invited to think it out.
Reference:
"Mate" by Geoffrey Miller and Tucker Max discusses the asymmetry of sexual misconduct. Where a minority of repeated offenders cause innumerable numbers of offences.
Two merchants have a dispute.
They go the the rabbi to arbitrate.
Come merchant 1 and details his side of events, the rabbi listens and nods: "You are right"
His opposite side come in with his perspective, and the rabbi goes "you are right"
The rabbi's wife is sitting there listening to the whole thing and she can't stand it:
What idiocy is this? he is right, and he is right too! this makes no sense.
The rabbi - calmly - "You are absolutely right"
This joke is quite descriptive of the #MeToo controversy.
Can both be right?
The women listing their various grievances and experiences AND the men saying that this is wierd extremism?
Yes, both are right.
How could that be?
We have many women that report on copious amounts of harassments / rape etc.
We have numerous men that listen to it dubiously. "This can't be true" they say with utter conviction.
The solution is statistical and very simple.
Repeated offenders.
Let's assume that we have 10 out of 100 men that are prolific sexual offenders.
He will harass a lot, rape if an opportunity arises, and generally engage in various unsavory behaviors towards women.
The other 90, are the average Joe. They might wink at a woman at the coffee shop, or even try to talk to her if they think she is looking back. They sometimes go to dates, and occasionally things aren't super clear. So they might on rate occasion displease a woman, but usually without malice of ill intent.
The women will suffer a lot. Few harassers are enough to terrorise many women.
A noxious men can inconvenience 20 women a day.
Average Joe will start talking to a woman once in awhile, but not in industrial numbers.
The average Joe looking at a woman to see if she is looking back, might not even be noticed by her. And if he is polite enough, she might not feel discomfort.
But the calouss one will be well remembered.
The number of times a woman is inappropriately approached might be very high. Even if most men will not harass.
Why would the average men believe the #MeToo stories? If he and his close friends never behave this way, how could he believe the stories?
Here comes the mix up of harassment and awkward encounters.
The average Joe has had his numbers of misunderstandings with women. Not malicious. usually not damaging either. But discomfiting nevertheless.
Average Joe will assume that #MeToo is about those subtle misunderstanding. And gesture wrongly comprehended. The mutually drunk encounter. The bad date. You name it.
Extreme feminists will help in this error.
They will drag real women suffering into the gray dating mishaps. They will say
"YES! you see this traumatised woman? She suffered from people like you that have not filled in the 200 page consent form before touching the lady finger"
"It is all insensitive gross misogynists like you all. Yes all men and you are not exempt"
Causing derision and disbelief. Making rape victims harder to believe. And putting off men from listening.
But the suffering is common and real. It just comes from a noxious minority.
PS. The implications for policy and public discourse are many. The reader is invited to think it out.
Reference:
"Mate" by Geoffrey Miller and Tucker Max discusses the asymmetry of sexual misconduct. Where a minority of repeated offenders cause innumerable numbers of offences.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment