I never moved the goal posts. You said Apatow’s career would have been in “serious jeopardy.” I said I didn’t think that was true. YOU then acted like I said he would have suffered “no consequences.” That is moving the goal posts.

I don’t think the woman who wrote this article, or the woman who wrote the linked articled, are Leslie Mann or the woman from 50 Shades of Grey, so there’s no hypocrisy in that sense.

The fuck?

Not men vs. women. I recognize the reality of who this sort of thing will generally affect. If it affects a specific man, that is bad for that man, as bad as it is for any specific man. It is not a general problem for men. If you can make the argument that it is, please do. Or proposition me again.

Sorry, not gay. Brave of you to admit, though.

Should we feel less sorry for the specific victims of specific victims of specific female rapists or murderers? No. Should we feel less outrage at the specific female rapists or specific female murderers themselves? No. Then again, you’re the one who posted an instance of “real” sexual harassment to counteract the…

Did I say “no consequences”? I did not. I said Apatow’s career would not be in jeopardy for making suggestive remarks to a reporter. Are any of the things you mentioned that?

Yes, I am downplaying it as an issue in general for men. I am not downplaying it as an issue where a specific man is a specific victim of specific harassment. The reason a think piece similar to the one here wouldn’t work for the video above is because there is not a history and culture of actresses treating male…

Holy shit, are you really this fucking stupid?

The difference in frequency is precisely why there is a difference in public outrage. This sort of treatment is a pervasive experience for women, not for men.

Sigh.

Awwww...bless your heart, you didn’t get the domestic violence thing. It’s okay, reading obviously isn’t your strong suit.

I had heard of the video before, thanks.

No, “that one time” is because the OP posted ONE video specifically to downplay the significance of this article, which is not about just one incident but a pervasive issue. The reason I am chastising the OP is because they are using that video to try to downplay a real systemic problem that largely victimizes women.

I guess you missed the part where I said they behaved poorly, and where I never implied that it wasn’t sexual harassment.

So, are you saying because those women behaved poorly that one time, what was described in this article is not “real” sexual harassment?

“This article tells men that workplace relationships should be a no no”

“This was a sweeping condemnation of all romantic workplace relationships, bc someone HAS to make a first awkward step in order to explore if there is even the most remote possibility of any social relationships outside of work.”

Yep, that was very polite when you told me I did not explain myself terribly well before, all because you apparently don’t understand the difference between “networking” and “nepotism.”

Okay, I described what I was saying as the ability to have a good name as a reference on a resume, or having people who can CONNECT you with powerful people, and you said that was the dictionary definition of nepotism, which it is not. Whatever.