Neil, really?
5/12/18 10:00![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mahnmut posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsNeil deGrasse Tyson and the Persistence of the Bad Male Apology
Advocates for survivors of sexual assault say statements like Tyson's are rarely about apologizing to alleged victims.
I used to think he's all for critical thought and all that stuff, and he may well still be - but his response to all this kerfuffle doesn't strike me as particularly sensitive to what #MeToo is really about. It's about inter-gender power dynamic (he was the boss of the woman he invited to his room after all) - not the presence or lack of a good sense of humor as some are making this sound.
Let's make something very clear. Responses like, "But how did she remember that I did all that stuff to her if she was really drugged?" are NOT helping.
Naturally, the usual question would come up again, "But why are they bringing this up NOW?" Well, guess what. The spirit of our time has become such that it has allowed women who've been victims of sexual harassment that's been prevalent for years and decades, and that has a lot to do with the above-mentioned inter-gender power dynamic, to finally feel comfortable enough to come out and speak. And we shouldn't underestimate the avalanche effect either, e.g. when one woman speaks and others see that she's getting support in response rather than the usual hush-hush and mansplaining, they also decide to come out in turn. And so it goes on. That's how culture tends to change, folks.
And guys like NdGT, as much as we love him for all he's done to popularize science and critical thought, should recognize this, instead of issuing half-assed, too-little-too-late apologies, or even worse, doubling down on those they may or may not have slighted.
Note: I'm saying "may not have". Because, if we're to remain true to the principles of critical thought that he professes (and the legal system too), the Innocent Until Proven Guilty premise should have precedence. Let's hear all sides of the story, and try to understand them, while refraining from judging. Obviously, it's one's word against another's at this point, so no real legal action could be taken. But there's much more beyond that - public perception, personal credibility and people's belief in a person's integrity that could affect their career and their standing in society - and yes, character assassination, too. That can be a factor. Let's take all this into account before hasting to judge any side. But let's also assume that if a number of women have decided to come out and speak, there must be some substance and truth to what they have to say.
And, Neil, next time you decide to reach under a woman's sleeveless blouse to find where she has tatooed Pluto, despite all your curiosity, please, PLEASE think twice and ask for permission first. Better yet, ask her if it's approriate if she did it herself. It can't be that hard for a guy like yourself, can it?
Advocates for survivors of sexual assault say statements like Tyson's are rarely about apologizing to alleged victims.
I used to think he's all for critical thought and all that stuff, and he may well still be - but his response to all this kerfuffle doesn't strike me as particularly sensitive to what #MeToo is really about. It's about inter-gender power dynamic (he was the boss of the woman he invited to his room after all) - not the presence or lack of a good sense of humor as some are making this sound.
Let's make something very clear. Responses like, "But how did she remember that I did all that stuff to her if she was really drugged?" are NOT helping.
Naturally, the usual question would come up again, "But why are they bringing this up NOW?" Well, guess what. The spirit of our time has become such that it has allowed women who've been victims of sexual harassment that's been prevalent for years and decades, and that has a lot to do with the above-mentioned inter-gender power dynamic, to finally feel comfortable enough to come out and speak. And we shouldn't underestimate the avalanche effect either, e.g. when one woman speaks and others see that she's getting support in response rather than the usual hush-hush and mansplaining, they also decide to come out in turn. And so it goes on. That's how culture tends to change, folks.
And guys like NdGT, as much as we love him for all he's done to popularize science and critical thought, should recognize this, instead of issuing half-assed, too-little-too-late apologies, or even worse, doubling down on those they may or may not have slighted.
Note: I'm saying "may not have". Because, if we're to remain true to the principles of critical thought that he professes (and the legal system too), the Innocent Until Proven Guilty premise should have precedence. Let's hear all sides of the story, and try to understand them, while refraining from judging. Obviously, it's one's word against another's at this point, so no real legal action could be taken. But there's much more beyond that - public perception, personal credibility and people's belief in a person's integrity that could affect their career and their standing in society - and yes, character assassination, too. That can be a factor. Let's take all this into account before hasting to judge any side. But let's also assume that if a number of women have decided to come out and speak, there must be some substance and truth to what they have to say.
And, Neil, next time you decide to reach under a woman's sleeveless blouse to find where she has tatooed Pluto, despite all your curiosity, please, PLEASE think twice and ask for permission first. Better yet, ask her if it's approriate if she did it herself. It can't be that hard for a guy like yourself, can it?
(no subject)
Date: 6/12/18 11:30 (UTC)