I have very mixed feelings about #MeToo, but this seems inaccurate or perhaps even disingenuous. Why, during a long and steep decline in the
incidence of sexual violence in America, did
academics, federal officials, and the #MeToo
movement discover a new “epidemic of sexual
assault”?
A lot of topics discussed around #MeToo involved sexual conduct that was not previously considered to be sexual assault.A prime example would be the misconduct allegations against Harvey Weinstein. For much of human history his sexual quid pro quo would have been viewed somewhere between "acceptable" and "sleazy, but not in the same category as forcible sexual assault." #MeToo brought in a growing awareness around that sort of harmful misconduct. Critics could correctly point out that this represented a moving of the goalposts, a widening of the definition of assault. In my opinion (and in many peoples' opinions) this was a positive change. But it was, inarguably, a change. Zooming out, though, let's look at the author's main point: For career activists, success is a threat.
They can never declare mission accomplished.
This is the most blatant sort of mental gymnastics.Two of the many flaws: One: Which of the mentioned groups can possibly reasonably claim "victory!?" The groups mentioned in the article have achieved significant gains but not victory. I do not speak for women, African-Americans, or the LGBT+ community. But it's not a stretch to say that "victory" for these groups would mean fully equal rights and opportunities relative to others. If you think those groups have achieved that, I would urge you to learn more about their experiences. Two: The fight to retain those gains can never end. Because the opposition never stops fighting. Women were pretty sure they'd achieved some kind of reproductive rights in America, and then Roe vs. Wade was overturned. The fight can never end because the opposition never stops fighting. |