By David Futrelle
It’s a rarity in this year of terrible, but tonight has been a night of actual good news! Dems are winning elections, and Reddit has banned the toxic cesspool known as the Incels subreddit! Celebrate while you can in this open thread!
No trolls. Fuck trolls.
This is the first time a wall of news notifications hasn't been a nightmare in god knows how long pic.twitter.com/NpTaW5QK6e
— Ashley Feinberg (ashleyfeinberg.bsky.social) (@ashleyfeinberg) November 8, 2017
Dems have won all three of the marquee off-year races — NJGov, VAGov, NYC Mayor — for the first time since 1989.
— David Weigel (@daveweigel) November 8, 2017
Democrats decimated Republicans across the country tonight, at every level and in every branch of state government.
— Seth Abramson (@SethAbramson) November 8, 2017
Thanks, Trump!
And this is the icing on the cake:
Trans woman Danica Roem (D) just defeated anti-LGBTQ candidate Bob Marshall (R) in Virginia, becoming the first trans state legislator in America.
— Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) November 8, 2017
The man who wrote the anti-trans bathroom bill just lost the election to a trans woman. Let that sink in. https://t.co/KFEZXSYvMy
— Laura Bassett (@LEBassett) November 8, 2017
Oh, and there’s this:
Jeff Sessions' DOJ Drops Prosecution Of Woman Who Laughed At Jeff Sessions https://t.co/slOPOhmLYN pic.twitter.com/ekRsU1RJAq
— Curt and Frank 🏳️🌈 (@curtandfrank) November 7, 2017
Let’s all celebrate by laughing at Jeff Sessions!
Meanwhile, on Reddit:
Reddit has banned the Incels subreddit. About fucking time; it was a cesspool of misogyny and violent hate. pic.twitter.com/8RieXtxZLN
— David Futrelle (@DavidFutrelle) November 8, 2017
HEALTH NOTE: Though cheered by tonight’s news, I’m still dealing with a shitstorm of health issues. I will return to regular posting as soon as I can, but I’m not sure when that will be. Thanks again for your patience and your support!
@Moggie
“I would hate to be a journo reporting on that story. To be handed a story which could literally begin “there was a young man from Nantucket”, and be totally unable to use that line, would just be torture.”
See, this is one of the many, many reasons why I could never be in journalism, because at least 50% of my article would be references to the various forms of the limerick. :p
Will take me long time to go back and find if someone said this – but from my memory I don’t think this is what anyone said. seems full conversation is criticism of offenders going to rehab and then discussion about if sex addiction real or not real.
I think it is clear they using rehab for protection and I think other people here also said same.
I know plenty people here have more expensive than me about adicton and going for rehabilitation – but really I feel now it distract from what is really happening here. and what always happen when rich and famous people commit the crime. it is already stereotypes that celebrity going ‘in and out’ of rehab – and also that they often not charged with crimes, because of protection of fame.
and about arrested – if someone is suspected they can be taken by police for questioning. if they come because they agree that is okay and then they leave but sometimes they can take by force if they not want to come – because resisting to go show they try to hide something.
in 2015 Harvey Weinstein questioned by police – with no result. now 2 years later he speaks with police again and then nothing and runs to rehab. you telling me that if this would be normal person, man of coulor for example, situation would be same?
“you telling me that if this would be normal person, man of coulor for example, situation would be same?”
If it was a man of color I would expect the Nantucket police to mistake his wallet for a “gun” and shoot him. I wish I was joking.
Uh, “normal” men get away with sexual harassment, partner violence, child molestation and rape all the time. Including men of color who usually victimize women of color.
I’m not really comfortable with the argument that Weinstein and Spacey only get to go to sex addiction rehab because they’re wealthy and powerful.
@WWTH
Also, THIS.
And as I said, it also really depends on who the victims are. I live in liberal New England, and I can count how many times I’ve heard the local Republicans hand-wave away Roy Moore’s accusers with “dating teenagers is just how ‘they’ are down in Alabama”. (GRRRRRRR) Somehow these same people don’t think that a middle-aged man trying to have “sex”* with teenaged boys in Nantucket is ok.
Cue my “surprised” face.
*Yes I understand that rape/sexual assault is not “sex”. I’m speaking from the Repubs fucked-up POV, since they seem to think that the Moore incidents just involve a man “hoping to get laid”.
And now I feel like vomiting into a bucket.
wwth
I didn’t mean to say like that, I remember normal is not really good word to use. but from this perspective, I see their fame and money really does protect them. for example, Roman Polanskiy is able to run from his conviction and never be punished and he is protected by his rich friends. people like whoopie Goldberg say now me must to come back to America, it is not fair someone so talented must be punished ((
And it is not rehab in this case which is important, which is what I tried to say but not clear. I am say even if they don’t go in rehab, their money and fame give them big advantage to avoid conviction.
I understand it is not one thing which protects them. It is culture of patriarchy fear of victims from police who will not believe them, fear of society which will blame them. this also protect Weinstein and spacey, of course i understand. but I am confused how we argue so much here about if sex addiction real or not real. if their fame and money not only thing which protect them, then saying they are sex addicts even smaller detail which takes attention from more important causes.
@Valentin
I’m starting to wonder if you missed the first half if the conversation? 🙂
I do not believe that anyone here is saying that either Spacey or Weinstein are “sex addicts”- including me. What they are, are RAPISTS!
About someone asking a page back, why Germany chanced its laws about mariage:
If I remember correctly it had to with the refuges. There were some child mariages among them. Enough that it was a problem and got people realy unconfortable.
That was the reason that the looked at the law and with Germany having a Great Coalition prior to the last vote, lawchances were easier to make than in other times.
About accepting laws of other countrys: It will get interesting if a couple moves from another European country and one of them is only 16.
@ mrex
I read everything since becoming of sex addiction discussion. and I know you say that but plenty of people must to say it is not sex addiction it is rape action many times before everyone seem clear on this one, even if everyone already agree they lying about being sex addicts. seems like big argument over nothing or one small small thing.
but really to be more clear – it is complicated issue and I become concerned that we concentrating too much on one small small detail. detail I try to say is part of because they have so much money and fame to protect them.
and then wwth say correct, it not just money and fame which protect them, but other factors which allow abuse epidemic from top to bottom of society.
I’m not well versed on the effectual nature of specific kinds of addiction treatment, but I will contribute by offering to talk about what I see and can see as a janitor on a drug rehab unit with room for more than 20. It’s got AA and lots of other things. I listen in on everything whether I want to or not.
In other news I was able to respond to everything in the comment thread of an article about an accuser. I’m feeling better about this. In addition to pressing very hard about evidence for mental illness via diagnostic criteria and samples of the accusers communications I’ve been demanding examples of the same from several people. It’s a simple message so it’s gotten easier to be creative and routine.
I’ve also had to remind people that we are not in a courtroom and I’m making no assumptions about the accused so courtroom technicalities like “presumption of innocence” is irrelevant to showing me what the accuser communicated. More than one use for “we are not in a court room”.
I straight up told the people using mockery, ridicule and other forms of humor that they are basically telling me what they are angry, afraid or disgusted by so they can continue all the wish, I’m taking notes.
I don’t know much about sex addiction except to say that an addiction and the social misuse of a diagnosis of an addiction are things that need separate treatment as social problems (sex addiction being the specific type here). The way that they are related is information for helping each one individually.
Oh dear, now it’s Al Franken:
Might as well assume that every guy in entertainment and politics is an abusive douche.
@Valentin
“but really to be more clear – it is complicated issue and I become concerned that we concentrating too much on one small small detail. detail I try to say is part of because they have so much money and fame to protect them.”
That’s a very fair point.
Oh no, not Al Franken too. He was one of our best progressive voices.
I’m starting to think more ace people should run for office.
@Alan
It is pretty hilarious. They’re spammers, playing a numbers game. The crudeness of their approach is deliberate. It’s a filter to weed out women who don’t tolerate boundary violations, similar to the way spam letters are full of misspellings and grammatical errors. Recipients who overlook those things are more likely to overlook other red flags.
But yes, I love the guys who swear up and down that “It works!!” Of course it works, in the same sense that typewriters, monkeys, and Hamlet work.
(Note the assumption that men are in charge of all hiring.)
How about we not hire the men who claim not to know when they’re overstepping? Seems to me an employee who is (willfully) clueless about social boundaries is highly likely to have similar “misunderstandings” when it comes to, say, embezzling or taking credit for others’ work. There was that study that came out a few months ago showing that in academia and the workplace, certain detrimental behaviors cluster together. If an employee is a serial sexual harasser, the chances of their engaging in other related behaviors are higher. The common factor being the belief that other people’s ideas, bodies, and property are theirs for the taking.
I’d hire 100 harassment victims before I hired even a single harasser.
WWTH:
Farrel actually meant the Brad Pit, a fraternal collective of young, hot men who live in a cave and are all known as “Brad”. They’re so good looking, you wouldn’t mind accidentally stumbling over on your daily business and falling into the Brad Pit.
Yeah, saw the Franken news too. His tweeted response struck me as flippant. Damn it, Al….
@mrex, @shadowplay, etc
Don’t have a huge amount of time to reply, so will make it brief.
The big issue, I think, is a semantic one, around what “sex rehab” and more generally “rehab” means. In this discussion of rich-asshole-pedophiles, “going to rehab” is a very different sort of thing than an average person going to rehab, but we’re using the same words for both.
For a not-rich person, “going to rehab” involves going to an evening meeting a couple of nights a week while they’re working. Like, if a dude is arrested on a DUI but is required to go to rehab instead of going to jail, they aren’t going to an actual place. They stay at home, keep working,a nd have to do their AA classes. Same with domestic violence.
For a rich person, “going to rehab” involves going to some ranch or resort and staying out of sight of the public for awhile. There may or may not be actual rehab stuff going on, but it’s not uncomfortable, and the point’s to appear to be dealing with the problem. Whether the problem is actually handled is irrelevant as long as appearances are made. (note: I’m sure there are actual rehab resorts that do address the problem. I’m just saying that that’s not the primary purpose of the thing.)
There are people who have problems with sex – For every thing under the sun, there’s someone out there with an unhealthy relationship to it. Sex is a fundamental aspect of personality (even for aces; absences and subdued presences can be fundamental too). Getting help to those people with those problems is a good thing, and I don’t think anyone here disagrees with that. Calling both “getting help to people with problems” and “giving rich assholes cover for their predatory behaviour” the same word – rehab – is one of the unfortunate growths of the english languages, because they’re very different things.
I think that sorts that? Do let me know if there are factors I’ve left out.
# AA, and “rehab isn’t effective”
I don’t at all mean to suggest that it doesn’t work for anyone, and I’m very glad it worked for you, Shadowplay! I agree that the state of counselling help for not-rich people is atrocious, both in the US and elsewhere. I wouldn’t want to remove it. It’s just not really all that effective compared to other sorts of help. And on a personal note, it makes me angry. I had a friend whose boyfriend had to go to AA meetings which were basically nothing more than high pressure evangelical conversion sessions, and the court refused to let him take some other option, even if he paid for them.
I can’t recall the statistics source, but there was something about AA being about as effective as going and sitting in a room with friends (and no alcohol) for a couple of hours a week. Suggests it’s not about the AA program at all, and the problematic elements of that program can be dropped.
Either way, please don’t misread me! I want widespread help for everyone – but I want that help to be real, and effective, and planted in reality. AA can be better than it is now, and it should try.
# Addiction in general
There’s very good research out there showing that addiction is mostly just a compulsion, and that the physical side of addiction isn’t nearly as strong as we make it out to be. Of course, we don’t know enough about the biology to really dig into that yet, but we’re making good strides, and what we can see is pretty tantalizing.
There’s been some talk here about the long-term potentiation, and “you never lose the temptation”, and whatnot, which is true. But it’s the exact same mechanism that makes you love a flavour of ice cream, or really like going for a morning swim, or makes you seek out the works of a specific musician. It’s not supernaturally powerful – yes, even with sex. Dopamine isn’t addictive, nor is it a “reward chemical”. That’d be the opioids. Dopamine is about sensitization, at least when it comes to this sort of problem. It’s about learning, and we are constantly swimming in it. Dopamine is involved in addictive behaviour, but it’s almost (not quite) incidental to it.
Addiction, and addiction therapy, is about learning and habituation. It’s about social behaviours and about anxiety and trauma. Therapy needs to treat that.
That’s my ramble! Sorry for the length and the sorta-half-ass answers. It’s really neat stuff though. Could go on for pages if you let me. Stupid work, gettin in the way of brain-time!
Not Al 🙁
I guess I’ll have to write the DFL and ask them to pressure him into not seeking reelection in 2020. I do not want to be forced to choose between an abuser and a Republican (or should I say between an abuser and a different type of abuser?) in a few years.
At this point I think men should stop worrying about whether or not feminists hate men and start thanking us for not saying that we hate them all.
Franken’s follow-up statement is much better: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/al-franken-ashamed-by-broadcasters-sexual-harassment-allegations-i-feel-disgusted-with-myself/
@Katamount
Better, I suppose, but still pretty worthless overall. I’m very dismayed by Franken, as I think he was a very good Senator and really tried to look out for his constituents.
But I have grown exceedingly tired of white older men, even “progressive “ ones.
Women only for my vote, from here on out. And there’s better not be a sexual predator in the bunch, either.
I welcome a Senate ethics investigation, too.
Then, that investigation can look into the payouts Congress has paid over the years to settle harrassment claims, and ask for their resignation, also. And then that same panel can oust the POTUS, who has a history of predatory behavior. Clean that fucking swamp up, not just skim the top of those considered scum because of partisan politics.
Fucking tired of it all. FUCKING TIRED.
Well, the HoR just passed their fucked-up screw the poor tax cuts.
FUCKING TIRED.
I want an all-female reboot of 2017. 🙁
@dreemr
Perhaps. I’ve heard enough “sorry, not sorry” apologies in my time to know when one’s deployed and Franken’s strikes me as sincere at the very least. He actually apologized to LeeAnn directly and owned up to his actions and at least understands why what he did was so bad.
I do agree that we’ve got enough old white guy politicians. We’re long overdue for a shakeup.
@Buttercup
Oh, we definitely should! Same time tho, let’s maybe not give us a get outta jail free card here. Relative disinclination to sex doesn’t make one not a sexual predator. As the saying goes, ‘attraction, not behavior’. And besides, last thing anybody needs is for someone to get the bright idea to defend against assault allegations with ‘see, your honor, I couldn’t have done what I’m accused of, I’m asexual’