Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by AmericanChopper 1684 days ago
The problem with metoo is that the solution it envisioned for the problem, was to attempt to undermine the justice portion of the justice system as much as it could, and to create as many avenues for extrajudicial punishment as it possibly could. The entirely inevitable outcome of this is that these new systems were put to use by people to enact personal agendas, in any venue where interpersonal politics was relevant. Which is why we have a growing cohort of people who now reactivity think that any accusation is more likely to be false than true.

Sure, these accusations can be very hard to prove. But an accusation of a false accusation is even harder to prove. Yet most people will be inclined to reactively put their faith in one of those accusations, but not the other. The idea we’ve come up with to resolve this tension is the presumption of innocence, and that accusations must be proven for justice to be carried out. This is one of the foundational moral and legal principles of all liberal democracies. While people might end up frustrated by the unavoidable outcome that sometimes, some conflicts can’t be satisfactorily resolved, throwing out the core principles of justice seems like a bad solution to some people.

1 comments

#metoo was literally about bringing the attention to the scale of the problem and raising awareness, and normalize talking about abuse, so that it wouldn't continue in silence.

The court of public opinion has existed before and after #metoo. Let's not pretend that #metoo invented it. If twenty people were to go public and say that Justin Bieber beat each of them with a crowbar, Justin Bieber would have some 'splainin to do, whether or not there's a court case.

If twenty people gave interviews and said that Martha Stewart personally fed them poisoned pies for shits and giggles, Martha would be affected by that, whether these people decide to sue or not.

But the society made an exception for sexual abuse. Rape and drugging in particular. #metoo simply made it count just as much.

Yes, and that's why we have libel laws: to stop these kinds of things from being "judged" in the court of public opinion. Raising awareness and providing support are all fine and very necessary, but the extrajudicial punishments is where the movement lost my support. Still, extrajudicial punishment is what we're left with if the judicial system fails to do justice.
Why did the movement lose your support? It didn't advocate removal of libel laws, did it?

And "extrajudicial punishment" is a stretch for "I have a right to tell people what happened to me without shame and harrasment".

Did #metoo make a call to burn people at stakes that I missed?

You're kidding, right? You think that all of the things listed below are instances of "I have a right to tell people what happened to me without shame and harrasment", and none are instances of virtual stake burning? Note: this is the result of just five minutes of keyword searches, I have no opinion on the actual merits of these cases, just disproving your claim that there is no extrajudicial punishment associated with the movement:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenrobinsonjacobs/2020/06/30/...

https://www.tampabay.com/blogs/media/2017/10/31/house-of-car...

https://blog.mozilla.org/en/mozilla/brendan-eich-steps-down-...

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-the-cancelling-of-j...

https://nypost.com/2020/06/11/the-wing-ceo-audrey-gelman-res...

https://pagesix.com/2020/07/01/essence-ceo-richelieu-dennis-...

https://www.distractify.com/p/tyler-joseph-canceled

https://www.rt.com/news/535587-depp-cancel-culture-festival/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57426579

The things you listed look like a random collection of things that happened where there was some controversy.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, looks like you attribute all scandals to #metoo agenda.