America is in the heat of a huge cultural shift wherein egregious systemic sexual harassment is finally being outed. As of the end of 2017, it peaked and I predict, is ready to morph into something else. On the one hand we’re ready to evolve, on the other, there may be troublesome repercussions.
During the past several months, it wasn’t unusual to see at least eight or ten stories per day on major web news outlets stories, of men discovered or fired because of sexual harassment in the workplace and offices, now, they’re gone. So why, when there have been millennia of male jerks and put upon female victims, why did we see this flourish of behavioral correction? Surely it had to be more than the threat of a NYT news expose’ of Weinstein. Reporters have been receiving intel of this sort for a long time, writing the stories, occasionally getting them published, and even less occasionally, running some sap out of a position or office. Why did it become a movement, now?
There is science that lends itself to macro-behavioral trends, quirks in anthropology, or even stranger mass behavioral phenomena. The point here is that the present sexual harassment campaign fits more into that rubric than in understanding some steady progressive march toward better behavior.
Women especially should be savvy about this because there could very well be a rebound. That would be a shame because lecherous behavior by public-facing titans serves no good purpose. Here are the reasons why this movement will not go well moving forward:
- It is mostly limited to high profile men that are at the latter phase of their careers
- It has barely touched ‘common’ people
- It to-date, has not equitably affected some of the most notorious abusers; can anyone say Clinton?
- It has barely if at all, called out female culprits
- It has already lumped in gross abusers along with those who have not had the benefit of an investigation
- Any dissent from anyone, male or female is shouted down in the public square, it’s starting to look like a cancerous revolution
It must be mentioned that there are also gold diggers, the duplicitous, and opportunist among the ranks of legitimate accusers. To the extent that that may be shouted down, proves my last point. This is does not make for the betterment of culture. Even more basic than this is the implication of a guileless gender that underlies a lot current rhetoric. Granted, men are certainly far more corruptible in the sex department, far guiltier, but when the entire female gender are automatically regarded as violated angels at the hands of an absolute depraved male sex, this does not reflect reality and will create massive blowback. When we hold rich powerful men to saintly standards and ignore or even encourage the foibles of everyone else, who do you think will have the last laugh?