An Open Letter To Pablo, Who’s ‘Confused’ About Our #MeToo Column In The Indy Star

In case you missed it, we recently wrote about the #metoo movement for our local newspaper, and talked about the fact that the pendulum has swung waaaaay too far to one side. We said that this “sex panic” needs to stop, because what’s at risk is not only the very concept of due process, but also male/female relationships in the workplace. You should really read the whole thing, because you’ll need it for context when you see Pablo Svirksy’s Letter To The Editor about it.

Pablo’s confused, y’all. He wrote:

I am a little confused by the Dec. 11 op-ed from the Chicks on the Right. They express concern that the pendulum has swung too far on the issue of sexual harassment and that society should be careful about taking this movement too far. They warn us about false accusations and trivializing assault. A “proper balance must be restored,” they say. However, after noting that “it’s nearly impossible to go a day without hearing of another accusation,” they provide zero examples of false accusations or of men facing overzealous reactions. It seems they are suggesting that we be careful about believing every woman’s story of assault because just maybe some of them in the future might be fake.

Let’s just address that right now. It’d be easy to dismiss Pablo’s comment by simply responding, “We’re only allowed 700 words for our columns” and leave it at that. But that’s not the only reason we didn’t include examples of false accusations or of men facing overzealous reactions. The biggest reason should be obvious – and that is that we have NO WAY OF KNOWING how many of the recent allegations/accusations are false, because we are now living in a society that no longer cares about due process. Which is kind of the point.

But you want examples, Pablo? Have some examples. Here’s one. Here’s another. Here’s some more. And another. And another. And another. OH, here’s another one. And of course, let’s not forget the whole Rolling Stone/UVA debacle. Or the Duke Lacrosse team.

Enough examples for you?  Because I could go on, but hopefully you get the point.  It’s not that some accusations in the future might be fake.  It’s that they most certainly WILL be fake, if history is any indicator (and it usually is.)

Oh – you need examples of how this movement can cause negative shifts in the workplace too? Here you go. Those messages were received after we did a call-in topic about this on our radio show. So, these messages were in addition to the calls. That was just a tiny sampling.

You had more to say in your letter:

Moreover, they somehow take the current climate to mean that men should be careful regarding their interactions with female colleagues. They note that “Men can’t be blamed for being cautious about how they approach and interact with women now” and warn of a world where men and women need supervision to work together. Are we reading the same news? Every major story on the subject has involved men groping, assaulting, harassing, raping, etc. Maybe I’m old fashioned, but it seems like the only caution men need to be taking is to stop assaulting women.

You have obviously missed the point. The #metoo campaign isn’t just about physical assault – it includes inane things like unwanted compliments, catcalls, perceived intrusive questions, etc. It’s super easy to simply say, “What’s the big deal? Men just need to stop assaulting women!” But that’s not the only type of complaint that now falls under the broad category of sexual harassment. And the worst part? For every woman, the standards are different. Much of what makes a man’s attention “unwanted” is whether or not the woman is interested in him. When women are interested in a man, suddenly the standards change. It’s kinda like how a fetus is only a baby depending on whether or not a woman wants it, according to feminists’ insane definitions. She wants a baby? It’s a baby. She doesn’t want a baby? It’s just a clump of cells.

Same thing applies here. She’s interested in a man? Compliments and questions about weekend plans are welcomed. Not interested? Those things could easily be considered harassment because of the “unwelcome” aspect of them. So what do you think men will do? If they have any sense of self-preservation, many will STOP INTERACTING WITH WOMEN.  Especially one on one.

And don’t even get me started on the misuse and effective dilution of the word ‘rape.’ The examples of this absurdity are endless.

You wrapped your letter with this breathtakingly simplistic piece of advice for men:

Don’t grab women. Don’t expose yourself to women. Don’t harass women. Don’t force yourself on women. Follow some basic protocol for decency and you’ll be just fine without supervision.

Pablo Svirsky

No – men won’t be “just fine” for the reasons I just outlined. It’s cute that you think this is all an overreaction, but you’re not the one taking calls from our listeners and hearing how afraid they are to have simple friendly banter with their female co-workers now. You’re not hearing from the folks who’ve been falsely accused of harassment or worse and had their lives ruined. Here’s just one example. And it’s one of far too many.

Based on your public post about this on FB, it seems you had additional questions as well. Like when you wrote this:

These two women write shit like this all the time. It’s unbelievable. This particularly point was just so small-minded. Just because they’ve never felt scared or in danger because of catcalls, doesn’t mean it’s okay.

We never suggested that catcalls are “okay.” We suggested they’re pointless and ineffective. Here’s exactly what we wrote:

We don’t mind a good dirty joke; we giggle at catcalls because they’re so completely ineffectual and pointless; and we maintain a healthy sense of humor about relationships between men and women. And as female adults, we are quite capable of telling men directly if they cross a line. That’s what empowerment looks like.

That empowerment thing seems to be a missing link in too many situations – even though as grown women, we are perfectly capable of setting boundaries and telling men when and if they’re out of line. But nope – now we’ve got companies cancelling Christmas parties altogether because grown adults apparently can no longer be trusted to behave around one another.  So when we write that there’s a legitimate reason to worry that we’re at a point where we’re going to require third person supervision in the workplace, we’re basing that on things that are Actually Happening.  Not stuff we just made up out of thin air.  Our point was that we enjoy playful banter with our male co-workers – banter that to other women could totally qualify as “sexual harassment.” The rules vary by the woman. And that’s what makes this entire conversation so complicated. Far more complicated than simply saying, “Don’t harass women.”

You also said:

Par for the course. They are so hard to read. But they get in the paper once a month or two, always with this kind of crap. Arguments where they say 1+1 is obviously 2 but we shouldn’t have to live with it being 10! They are just awful.

Yeah. We’re awful. We are SO AWFUL to consider more than one angle of a story!  HOW DARE WE.

Your relative (I’m assuming, based on the last name) also had this to say:

Well said, Pablo! And I also appreciated some of the points made by Richard Price. Even the “Chicks on Right” have a point in the sense that the right equilibrium needs to found. However, their editorial as a whole was mind-blowingly dumb. They state: “Teen Vogue columnist Emily Lindin wrote on Twitter, “If some innocent men’s reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.”” and then they jump to…”But this is where we are. Actual guilt no longer necessarily matters. Women are to be believed, no matter what. And if you suggest otherwise, you’re victim blaming.”

WHAT? And they reach this conclusion because one Teen Vogue columnist tweeted something? This is the worst case of a straw man argument I have seen in a long, long time.

Huh? We didn’t reach that conclusion based on one tweet. We based it on REALITY. Every allegation we’re hearing about in the media is assumed true with no due process. This isn’t in our imaginations. Look at celebrity feminists insisting constantly that women are to be believed no matter what. They’re in lockstep on this position. We didn’t just make this up.

Just ask Tavis Smiley.

Anyway, hope that clears up your confusion, Pablo. I’ll link you to this on your public FB page so that you’re sure to see it.  If you have further questions and would like to take a break from insulting us to ask them, do let us know.