This topic is a minefield today, but I'm very glad that Catherine spoke what many are thinking. Rape and aggressive harassment will always be wrong. But to conflate the wrongness of a physical attack with a misguided attempt at flattery is worse than wrong: if a simple "you look nice today" is treated and punished as a crime equal to rape, then the two things are morally the same, right? Wrong!

So when the formidable Catherine says,

“As women we do not recognise ourselves in this feminism, which beyond denouncing the abuse of power takes on a hatred of men and of sexuality.”

They insisted that women were “sufficiently aware that the sexual urge is by its nature wild and aggressive. But we are also clear-eyed enough not to confuse an awkward attempt to pick someone up with a sexual attack.”

... everyone should pay attention.

The Grand Canyon between flirting and assaulting shouldn't be ignored. Nor should familial embraces bring on charges of "Uncle Pervert."

But a correction in the mostly one-sided, and very real, harassment problem, and the environment that fosters it, should have taken place decades ago. I feel bad for the fairly innocent people who are caught up in it, but I am relieved that it will no longer be a situation that is tolerated in private life, business, or (almost all) government.

I suspect that Catherine is talking about more benign scenarios than the infamous Casting Couch, but who knows? Vive la 'wild and aggressive' France?

Quote from serafina

When I was still a university student I worked briefly as a stewardess in supermarkets and it was not nice. Besides, I was promoting a world renowned brand of chocolate & hazelnut cream spread which was often used as a subject for their naughty comments. I did it for 3 weekends, then I gave up.

You should have slimed them!

So, is proposition sexual harassment these days? Let's look at the Weinstein case, in which the odious pig obviously showed off his cock, made women watch him shower and so on... that was harassment. But was it harassment to ask the women to watch him shower if their answer was no and the matter was dropped?

In other words if I hypothetically asked a women "do you want to fuck in the toilets of Burger King?" and she says "No" and I leave the subject, is that harassment? That would be a proposition on my part, admittedly a poor one, but where is the harassment there? I am using a very aggressive example to highlight the point that the line is now so thin that hysteria has taken over.

Quote from Semigoodlooking

So, is proposition sexual harassment these days? Let's look at the Weinstein case, in which the odious pig obviously showed off his cock, made women watch him shower and so on... that was harassment. But was it harassment to ask the women to watch him shower if their answer was no and the matter was dropped?

In other words if I hypothetically asked a women "do you want to fuck in the toilets of Burger King?" and she says "No" and I leave the subject, is that harassment? That would be a proposition on my part, admittedly a poor one, but where is the harassment there? I am using a very aggressive example to highlight the point that the line is now so thin that hysteria has taken over.

I agree with you completely. You and I don't indulge in that kind of piggish behavior - mostly because we respect other people too much for it to even cross our minds, but "fear of consequences" is also around, hovering.

Shouldn't the line be drawn somewhere in the vicinity of "was anyone hurt?" It can be a vague and grey line, but if the Burger King invitee laughs at you, calls you a limp-dick loser and goes on with her life, what else is needed?

One element that changes the playing field is whether the man is in a power position that could cost the woman her job or cause her other problems if she refuses? Weinstein, check. Al Franken, probably no check. Trump when he paid a hooker for her silence, no check. But Trump grabbing women by the genitals, check. Kevin Spacey hitting on contemporaries, no check. But Kevin Spacey hitting on a teenager, check.

Quote from serafina

What if the woman is working at Burger King? Or if you play the same line, day after day? Or if all clients say it?

That's the question: if there is no intimidation (or implication of force or violence) involved, and the woman (it's usually a woman) is free to say "hell no!" to the jerk, is any other action required? And should "any other action" include some mandatory labeling (with potential legal implications) as "harassment?" Or can we say that for most people this comes under the heading "annoyance," and doesn't rise to the level of needing official response.

You bring up the case where it's not sporadic, but a constant thing. No one would enjoy working in such a place, but if it's customers doing it, management should be able to handle it. If it's management that's doing it, that's something else. Can we all say "hostile work environment?" There are rules about that.

I think this article sums up the minefield being created. Once again, a noble cause (the MeToo movement) is being hijaked and distorted.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/0…be-sexual-harassment.html

This video is an impassioned condemnation of the actions of the anonymous accuser of Aziz Ansari. I think Ashleigh Banfield nails the complexity of the metoo movement and its backlash.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2…ault-accuser-banfield.hln