tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post6337052751148029790..comments2024-03-29T11:29:58.276+09:00Comments on BigHominid's Hairy Chasms: how deep does the rot go? (an exchange with my brother)Kevin Kimhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01328790917314282058noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-26064534485119403142017-12-06T14:42:16.051+09:002017-12-06T14:42:16.051+09:00Scott,
James Levine's case seems to be consis...Scott,<br /><br />James Levine's case seems to be consistent with the notion of gay men harassing men. At least three accusers against Levine thus far.Kevin Kimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01328790917314282058noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-48274913952120656832017-12-06T10:56:55.890+09:002017-12-06T10:56:55.890+09:00White-knighting is evidently not just a straight t...White-knighting is evidently not just a straight thang:<br /><br /><i>The “structural oppression” model is false, by the way. Homosexual male harassment is more prevalent than the percent gay men in the population would imply, suggesting that gay men harass men more often than straight men harass women. The obvious explanation for gender differences in harassment has always been that men constitute 80% of sexual harassers for the same reason they constitute 83% of arsonists, 81% of car thieves, and 85% of burglars. Since most men are straight, most victims are women; when the men happen to be gay, they victimize men. Men probably get victimized disproportionately often compared to the straight/gay ratio because society views harassing women as horrible but harassing men as funny. If this theory is right then it’s men who are the structural victims, which means it’s your harassment that doesn’t count and you’re the ones who shouldn’t be allowed to talk about it. The “it only matters if it’s structural” game isn’t so much fun now, is it?</i><br /><br />http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/12/04/against-overgendering-harassment/King Baeksuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15106210206814275410noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5541500.post-31564893699069747242017-12-06T05:57:24.623+09:002017-12-06T05:57:24.623+09:00Althouse has an interesting post this morning abou...Althouse has an interesting post this morning about allegations against Dustin Hoffman. http://althouse.blogspot.kr/2017/12/on-panel-before-screening-of-wag-dog.html<br /><br />The thing about these decades old accusations is that there is no presumption of innocence and defending yourself is considered evidence of your guilt. <br /><br />The interviewer in Hoffman's case, John Oliver, came right out and said it:<br /><br />"You've given no evidence to show it didn't happen."<br /><br />We are traveling down a slippery slope indeed.John Machttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02614775172062071697noreply@blogger.com