[runawaybottle]

There was a recent case of a Karen receiving mob justice to the point people began harassing the law firm her husband runs (granted she also works there), affecting their livelihood. We don’t want to get to a point in society where your character flaws destroy your life.

Just the other day, an out of context video embarrassed a supposed Karen on the front page of Reddit. We later learned the situation was more complex and didn’t have racial undertones. The mob still publicized a woman’s life.

#MeToo had several examples of people’s career being thrown out for offenses that were basically round objects being pushed into a square hole (Aziz Ansari, Al Franken, there were a few more).

I understand the need to use a chainsaw to cut a birthday cake, it highlights the desperation of the lack of tools to do a very basic thing. We now know, and quite frankly, we need to replace the chainsaw with a table knife sooner or later. Someone’s going to get hurt.

To keep the parallel, it’s important to see that the mob becomes the authority figure.

[TeaDrunk]

"There was a recent case of a Karen receiving mob justice to the point people began harassing the law firm her husband runs (granted she also works there), affecting their livelihood. We don’t want to get to a point in society where your character flaws destroy your life."

To be clear, this was after it was filmed that the couple was pointing guns at peaceful protestors who were protesting on the street. The woman in particular had her finger on the trigger and was pointing it at black people walking by. (EDIT: I don't know if you're familiar with gun handling, but this is considered extremely poor "trigger discipline", which is a term describing how to handle and hold a gun safely. This is comparable to driving drunk in its reckless endangerment. One should never point their gun at a person unless they intend to shoot that person. One should never put their finger on the trigger of their gun unless they intend to fire that gun. This woman, in violating both, is expressing her intent to shoot people.)

"#MeToo had several examples of people’s career being thrown out for offenses that were basically round objects being pushed into a square hole (Aziz Ansari, Al Franken, there were a few more)."

Aziz Ansari totally, 100% owned up to not recognizing how his fame affected the social dynamics in which he now functioned and how that in turn affects consent. He apologized and his career is ongoing.

Al Fraken took photos of himself groping a female soldier while she slept in her uniform, so there's definitive proof he was doing these things. He was in a position of power where he could access women and he chose to have photos taken of him groping people who are serving their country.

I see no round objects being pushed into square holes, here? What should be done with Al Franken, who groped soldiers in their sleep?

(EDIT: I should also note that character flaws ruin lives all the time. Someone who is more prone to recklessness or thrill seeking can get themselves or others killed. Someone who is more prone to addiction becomes addicted to a life-ruining dependency. Someone who is too arrogant can ruin their professional network. Someone who is too complacent in a setting where stuff can be made out of date quickly can swiftly find themselves out of work. I don't take it to be a large leap that someone with the character flaws of "threatens to kill innocent bystanders" and "gropes women in their sleep" might not also be negative in their lives.)

[runawaybottle]

I should have linked the event I was talking about, you are thinking about a different event:

https://nypost.com/2020/06/09/tamara-harrians-husband-blames...

What she did was indefensible, but her husband and his business is also having to reconcile this.

I believe Al Franken took a juvenile photo of a reporter friend. I don’t think he was a senator at the time, I could be wrong.

I think we will enter ‘full blinders on’ mode if we accept that the axe being wielded is not a catch all. We have to accept that the axe came out of desperation, but we need to find the solution where the axe is no longer necessary.

If there’s anything to debate, it’s only how long the guillotine should be necessary. Certainly we can’t have the guillotine forever. The guillotine was used to make it pretty freaking clear things have changed, and don’t even try to think things will go backward. I understand and accept it as a necessary strategy.

You still have to create the post-guillotine society.

In poetic terms, Robespierre was given the guillotine he created. Things go too far, often.

[TeaDrunk]

There's no guillotine. Aziz Ansari's career is totally fine. The statute of limitations on rape and other sexual assault ranges from 3 to 30 years. It seems completely reasonable to me that Al Franken should continue to have consequences on whose lives he harmed via sexual assault years after doing it. The effects of trauma last a lifetime. I don't understand why we should be sympathetic to one man having his life ruined for credibly also ruining the lives of multiple others.

Regarding the Tamara Harrians situation I don't know anything about it, could you link to another media besides NYPost?

[runawaybottle]

30 seconds of googling can get you the Tamara Harrrians link.

Look, patterns are important. The same way we failed in jailing people for modest drug possession, is the same way we are going to fail in measuring reciprocity, or more clearly, exact legal justice on sexual harassment, racial discrimination.

I’m interested in fixing patterns.

I’m not going to die on the Al Franken hill. Frat boy behavior in professional context is unacceptable, it will get you over time. In his particular case, I didn’t see any escalation into rape or abuse of power (fuck me or you won’t get this job or promotion - Harvey Weinstein).

We will be accurate in our words, accusation, and judgement, henceforth. We will cut cleanly and carefully, no more chainsaws, we will visit all crime sites, and assess. No more games.

It’s not reasonable to me for someone to suffer outsized social justice beyond the price paid at the moment of sentencing. You take someone like Louis CK, he paid the public shame, and career loss (financial loss). If the transgressions were beyond, such as underage sex (for example), I expect the law to quantify the retribution. Beyond that, I expect him to pay nothing more on a social level.

Name your price, I guess, and nothing more. Let it be paid, and move on. We are not gods that dole out eternal shame.

[TeaDrunk]

I don't think there's eternal shame to dole out. I think it's perfectly equivalent to say if you give someone lifelong trauma that the result should be lifelong consequences, including that people don't want to affiliate with you.

[jholman]

> if you give someone lifelong trauma that the result should be lifelong consequences

That is a terrible plan. There's no restoration there, only retribution. We can do better than an eye for an eye.

[pjc50]

Again, if the regular legal system would get in gear and e.g. prosecute the police who killed Breonna Taylor, or routinely take sexual assault allegations seriously, we wouldn't be needing any of this.

The dysfunctionality of regular politics creates its own escalation. People are used to being given a sticky door, or a button that doesn't work. They're used to shoulder-charging the door of power being completely ineffective. So when it actually gives way it's a surprise to everyone.