Vogue Columnist Under Fire After Dismissing Concerns Over The Innocence of Men In Sexual Harassment Cases

[de officiis]

Vogue Columnist Under Fire After Dismissing Concerns Over The Innocence of Men In Sexual Harassment Cases

Teen Vogue columnist Emily Lindin is under fire this week after writing how she is “not at all concerned about innocent men losing their jobs” over false allegations of sexual assault or harassment. . . . Lindin wrote that even raising false claims could be a sign of hostility to women. . . .

Lindin insisted that “false allegations VERY rarely happen, so even bringing it up borders on a derailment tactic. It’s a microscopic risk in comparison to the issue at hand (worldwide, systemic oppression of half the population).”

In her best Madame Thérèse Defarge imitation, Lindin declared “The benefit of all of us getting to finally tell the truth + the impact on victims FAR outweigh the loss of any one man’s reputation. If some innocent men’s reputations have to take a hit in the process of undoing the patriarchy, that is a price I am absolutely willing to pay.”

Of course, she will not have to pay that price because she is a woman and therefore always to be believed under her approach. Nevertheless, she goes on to justify the disinterest in the innocence of men by focusing on how women have been historically abused: “How many of our reputations have suffered unfairly? How many of our lives have ALREADY BEEN destroyed because of physical violence against us? Why was that acceptable, but now one man’s (potentially) unfair loss of a career opportunity is not?” Thus, because women have been abused, Lindin insisted they are entitled to abuse a certain percentage of men.

While the actual rate of false claims is subject to great debate, feminist writers often cite the figure of a three percent false reporting rate to justify rule changes (particularly on college campuses) that reduce due process protections for the accused. The source for the figure is rarely cited but may be a study published in 2010 in a symposium on violence against women. That study however found a rate of between 2% and 10%. However, this report focused on reported criminal sexual assaults and rapes. There is a vast difference in the type of cases involving sexual harassment and criminal assault. The step of reporting a crime to police is a significant one, including the added risk of being charged with filing a false police report. Allegations of sexual harassment or civil assault are generally protected at workplaces or schools. I expect that the rate of false claims is still quite low and there continues to be a serious problem in encouraging women to come forward when subjected to this type of abuse. However, the basis for the statistic cited by Lindin is unclear.

Of course, even if the three percent figure is accurate, it does not justify the dismissive approach of people like Lindin toward due process and innocence. The touchstone of a nation committed to the rule of law is that we do not change our approach based on general presumptions of guilt of any class of suspects. More importantly, respecting due process does not mean a lack of commitment to enforcement. . . . .

. . . .

Lindin, who writes on feminist topics like “slut shaming'”, sexist dress codes, and . . . how to send nude photos of oneself, responded to the criticism by taking her social media postings private. Like many columnists who write solely from one perspective and topic, Lindin sees most everything in gender terms. Thus, in listing how not to “slut shame,” she notes “I wasn’t allowed to dance by myself in the middle of a dance floor. And it was only because I was a girl.” Well, boys likely feel the same pressure not to dance alone in the middle of a dance floor. Indeed, in my experience, girls feel more comfortable dancing with other girls than boys do with other boys. However, this type of low-grade analysis is pushed by Conde Nast to capture an insulated audience for writers like Lindin. Her pieces have titles like “Why You Should Stop ‘Playing Hard to Get’ and Start Masturbating” (discussing her own experiences at aged 10). . . .

In the meantime, Teen Vogue’s parent company, Conde Nast, simply did not respond to journalists who asked for a response (It is not clear if Conde Nast still considers itself part of a journalistic enterprise and, if it does, how it squares with refusing to answer questions from the media.

I wonder how pervasive these destructive attitudes are. I would hope that most people believe that a controversy between a man and woman like this ought to be approached with an open and unbiased mind.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Teen Vogue Columnist?

This hard hitting piece on law and gender politics follow the article dedicated to which scarves tweens love this autumn?

I think we can dismiss the dismissal without further ado.

[Martin Hash]

Yeah, but the “How to Have Anal Sex” article was to die for.

[de officiis]

Teen Vogue Columnist?

This hard hitting piece on law and gender politics follow the article dedicated to which scarves tweens love this autumn?

I think we can dismiss the dismissal without further ado.

I thought we relished ado around here.

[heydaralon]

I use some of those make up tips in teen vogue. Wearing a pretty dress and being willing to talk to guys you want to notice you, has paid off enormously for me. You would be surprised at how helpful and hard hitting most of the articles are for that publication.

[de officiis]

I use some of those make up tips in teen vogue. Wearing a pretty dress and being willing to talk to guys you want to notice you, has paid off enormously for me. You would be surprised at how helpful and hard hitting most of the articles are for that publication.

Speaking of hard-hitting, check this one out.

[BjornP]

Not at all surprising for a culture that embraces collective guilt by association, collective victimization by association and the notion that truth itself is only true or false by association.

[Speaker to Animals]

Ideological subversion. This woman is totally lost. Sad.

[de officiis]

Not at all surprising for a culture that embraces collective guilt by association, collective victimization by association and the notion that truth itself is only true or false by association.

How are these claims viewed/handled in your society?

[BjornP]

Not at all surprising for a culture that embraces collective guilt by association, collective victimization by association and the notion that truth itself is only true or false by association.

How are these claims viewed/handled in your society?

That particular sentiment expressed in the OP article, would be subject to equal parts ridicule and challenge, by all segments of society, even by the people who are most sympathetic to the SJW'y messages of US (or Swedish) progressives. There's always been an emphasis on seeking consensus, compromise and dialogue in all social and political questions, so her article would be seen as beyond extreme. There are people, primarily in Copenhagen, and among what we call "culture radicals" (our version of progressives) who in the last decade but more publicly in the last two years or so, have adopted the way your SJW's talk about society. As in referring to ethnic Danes as "white people", Muslims as "brown people", and starting to adopt the narrative of "white privilege" when describing the relationship between them. Nevermind that such a narrative does not fit in a Danish cultural-historical context. But even they don't wish to abandon all Danish values.