It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


#NotMe hashtag kicks off backlash to rash of sexual harassment claims

page: 5
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in


posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 08:49 PM
a reply to: amazing

False accusations are not against the law..

Filing a false police report is..

Plus, I have never heard of ANYONE being prosecuted after their “attacker” was found innocent..

You can sue them civilly, but I’ve never heard of that and might be flat out prohibited..

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 08:58 PM
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

If a victim is directly lying to you and you find out too late they were lying? The damage is done, the life ruined and no way to take that back. Not hearsay, the actual person making the claim.

If you are truly discerning, do you even run a he said, she said piece? The MSM does and we all know that. The implication is they know when they could not, even if they are talking to the alleged victim directly.

If a woman came in to you, agreed to an interview, was a well thought of professional in a respected line of work and lied her rear end off on tape about a high profile person; how would you know?

Seems in politics, no proof is needed by even the most respected media. They just insert "alleged" and run with it way too often, not particularly caring about the impact on people who may well be innocent.

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:00 PM
I don't think this deserves a Op in itself, but...

Another one bites the dust

Tavis Smiley isn’t Charlie Rose but is a big time guy in the AA community and he has been taken down by guess what.

Though, I have to mention, this is not sexual crimes or groping involved, apparently he was having affairs with multiple woman on his staff.

That of course is deemed very inappropriate professionally therefore, I imagine, this is a justified suspension.

PBS announced it had suspended distribution of the Tavis Smiley show Wednesday after “multiple, credible” allegations of sexual misconduct by the show’s host, Tavis Smiley, were discovered during an investigation by the public broadcaster. The late-night talk show, which has aired on the network since 2004, is produced independently by Smiley’s production company TS Media. Neither Smiley nor the show’s employees are employed by PBS.
“PBS engaged an outside law firm to conduct an investigation immediately after learning of troubling allegations regarding Mr. Smiley,” the public broadcaster said in a statement. “This investigation included interviews with witnesses as well as with Mr. Smiley. The inquiry uncovered multiple, credible allegations of conduct that is inconsistent with the values and standards of PBS, and the totality of this information led to today’s decision.”
“The investigation found credible allegations that Smiley had engaged in sexual relationships with multiple subordinates,” sources told Variety. “Some witnesses interviewed expressed concern that their employment status was linked to the status of a sexual relationship with Smiley.”

This is a real epidemic now, so much so that soon these charges will be off the front pages and will be as regular as rain

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:04 PM
a reply to: amazing

Some of you snowflakes will get confused and angry about it and think me dumb

Far from it. As someone who occasionally browses the MGTOW forums, I actually agree with you. A lot of people are indeed drifting away from civil rights advocacy to fringe rants and even armchair quarterbacking. You can see this a lot with 3rd wave feminism as well, which has gotten less involved in advancing the cause of civil rights for women to those same tendencies seen at MGTOW and elsewhere.

But in all honesty, most of these women coming out are telling the truth. They don't come out sooner for a variety of reasons, mainly lack of support and fear of repercussions and fear of having their good names dragged through the mud.

No doubt about it, especially in this political climate. Regardless of what you do and who you are, somewhere around 50% of the country dislikes you at any given time (politically speaking, not in practical terms). I don't dispute the fact that a majority do indeed tell the truth. It is that minority of retribution/political smear oriented claims that bothers me. The worst part is that many believe they're helping advance their political cause. And while they may be temporarily correct, they are brushing over the fact that they are causing actual harm to real victims who now find it even harder to come forward thanks to the pitchfork wielding mobs (both sides have them) waiting to discredit them or use them to advance their narrative.

In any case, thanks for the thoughtful post and contribution to the discussion

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:15 PM
a reply to: Blaine91555

I am a technology editor, so thankfully, I don't have to deal with this issue often. That said, I wouldn't run a he said/she said piece based on statements from an alleged victim alone. Even if you report that you were fired for X reason I must contact your employer for their comment. I have seen stories go out based on pending litigation, police reports and so on. I have seen stories run based on "soandso reported that X accused Y of Z" but even those stories receive extra scrutiny from fact checkers, for obvious reasons.

I am not (personally) comfortable with stories that allege wrong doing when there is no way to objectively determine the veracity of an accusation. I am passionate about due process and the presumption of innocence. That said, there are myriad reasons why people often don't come forward with rape or harassment stories until years later. Honestly, the whole process is problematic. People lie. We have ways of determining whether an individual "believes" they are lying (that don't involve polygraphs) but they are not currently admissible as evidence in a court of law. The process is imperfect.

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:22 PM

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
I think you are being a bit naive here. First, slander or defamation trials are hard to win in the US.

We're not talking about slander or defamation, we're talking about making false allegations of criminal behavior which are a felony.

Secondly, often the public damage is done by such accusations regardless of a later suit outcome or reinstatement of employment. Thirdly, plenty of normal citizens cannot afford the legal fees for such law suits.

And if they are false the accuser can potentially be imprisoned and liable for damages. The justice system is not proactive, it's reactive. You seem to have an issue with how it functions. Occasionally people make false allegations, those people should be punished. You cannot proactively punish people because you think they may be false.

This issue is mostly being hashed out in the court of media and public discourse, not
actual trials. People are being called on either not to run for office or resign extra judicially. Therefore, the debate can't be limited to courts of law...

And in the vast bulk of these the person in question has admitted there was inpropriety. In the ones were they haven't admitted anything it needs to be investigated.

posted on Dec, 14 2017 @ 09:26 PM
a reply to: 0zzymand0s

I agree it's a problem for the media as well. Still though, I think even if interviews with both sides are ran, innocent lives can be ruined.

In the end, it's likely better that the media not cover these things and let the courts be the answer to dealing with it. I would not view that as covering up, but being responsible. Sadly though I'm sure competition for the most startling story will always make these stories suspect, no matter how respected the reporting is. If a politician says something though or it's about an accusation about a politician or public figure, it will hit the mainstream, always, wrong or right.

"The right of the people to know" is kind of laughable way too often. In some ways we were better off before the information explosion. It filtered the news in a good way.

Thanks for your reply

posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 12:16 AM

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Shamrock6
But did it leave an impression on you?

I saw that exchange.

I didn’t...
& I would very much like to, please, if you have a link.

I’m a very nosey person.
I also want to see Shamrock get owned by MisterSpock.

posted on Dec, 15 2017 @ 10:27 AM

originally posted by: Devino

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
I get your point historically. I know that for example many rapes go under reported, many never go to trial or are hard to prove. and that false accusations according to police are rare. I'm using rape as a good example.
Using rape as a good example, is that like seeing good in something bad?

However, that is different from the emergent media and political discourse, where much of this is being hashed out.

This is precisely why we still need to retain principles of innocent until proven guilt abd the right to address one's accusers. This is true for all crimes or accusations. It's a slippery slope and historically dangerous to do otherwise.
People still are innocent until proven guilty and have the right to address their accuser, in a court of law.

I think it might feel a bit overwhelming because we are seeing so many people coming out and not just in the US. This has been a huge problem for far too long. Diversity and sensitivity training that has been going on in many work places for decades has not worked. This is a consequence to all of this dismissal, denial and lack of action. Women are sick of it! Perhaps this will set precedence and make people think twice before harassing an employee.
By good example I meant something demonstrating the exact points you and I are discussing. But you already knew that didn't you...

Yes we need to address sexual assault and support legitimate claims by victims.

I think you are missing though the point that people shouldn't have the careers ruined just via social media accusations, etc. that's not due process. Don't use the letter of the law to violate its spirit.

posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 03:11 PM

originally posted by: DevinoYou've got it backwards. Historically it has been those being accused as being automatically believed to be innocent and the accusers, i.e. the victims, that have been dismissed and have almost no recourse for justice. Read the Time article I just linked to about the person of the year and see what you think.

This has been my experience as well. The accuser is looked at and asked "Well, what did you do to provoke this?" Any and all sexual activity of the accuser is dragged into the spotlight and used as a hammer to make them look like garbage who regularly sleeps around and is just looking for a payday.

You have to remember where many of these current accusers were accosted. Hollywood and in the world of politics. The cultures there are built up as such that if you dare to open your mouth and speak up, you might as well kiss your career goodbye because the ones doing the groping/assaulting are very high powered individuals with deep pockets in a highly corrupted world. There is a lot of fear to be the first to speak up. What if no one else dares to come forward? What if you're accused of being a mean spiteful person who's just bitter that they didn't get X or Y position or role?

Even girls in college and high school are looked at askance for daring to speak up. "Boys will be boys," afterall. "Sowing the wild oats. No means yes. She was drunk and therefore asking for it."

Sometimes it really does take someone else to make that first move before victimes feel safe enough to speak out.

posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 03:18 PM
What backlash? Seriously........................????????

Who actually mad about women (and men too) speaking up about sexual predators? Roy Moore supporters? The predators? NAMBLA?

I'm an atheist but I find this Johnny Cash tune very appropriate these days:

You can run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Sooner or later God'll cut you down
Sooner or later God'll cut you down

Well you may throw your rock and hide your hand
Workin' in the dark against your fellow man
But as sure as God made black and white
What's down in the dark will be brought to the light

You can run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Run on for a long time
Sooner or later God'll cut you down
Sooner or later God'll cut you down

Reckoning is here and I think its gonna get ugly before it get better

posted on Dec, 16 2017 @ 06:19 PM

originally posted by: FredT
Who actually mad about women (and men too) speaking up about sexual predators?

No one.

As long as the victims actually were/are victims.
And their claims are honest and reasonable.

posted on Dec, 17 2017 @ 07:12 AM
a reply to: JBurns

Well said. I was just commenting the other day about how the first 12 comments, which seems a lot to me, on the other post, was a bunch of heartless people saying how good it was that the KY Rep. killed himself. I was appalled.

I was raped when I was young. I survived and grew stronger. I would never even entertain the idea of joining #metoo. So many people say it's not the movement, it's the false accusers. I disagree. The movement, much like "mob mentality" has to be held accountable, especially when ruining someone's career, usually a man's career btw. And when causing, directly or indirectly, someone's death, their should be an investigation and charges brought.

top topics

<< 2  3  4   >>

log in