Contributor Post Created with Sketch. Men, #Me Too, and Moral Panics

Claire Berlinski, Ed.
By Claire Berlinski, Ed.
Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
Since earning her doctorate in international relations from Oxford University, Claire Berlinski has lived and worked in Britain, Thailand, Laos, Turkey and now France as a journalist, academic, editor, translator and freelance writer. She is the author of Menace in Europe: Why the Continent's Crisis is America's, Too and There is No Alternative: Why Margaret Thatcher Matters. She has also written two spy novels. Her writing has been published in publications including the Wall Street Journal, Th… [more]
|
93 COMMENTS
 

Based on a post I wrote here, I wrote a much longer piece about the Weinsteining phenomenon for The American Interest. (Warning: the language is not safe for work and not appropriate for Ricochet. That I used those words there doesn’t mean you can use them here. If you can figure out how to describe the Louis CK imbroglio in family-friendly language, more power to you.)

I was flabbergasted by the response. I had expected nothing but vituperation. I was fully braced for it, and had just decided, “Well, you’ll have an awful week, but it has to be said, so just stay off social media until it all blows over.” I pretty much figured I was Hal:

I was wrong. It seems to be the most widely-read and widely-appreciated article I’ve ever written, at least to judge from the site traffic and the mail I’ve received in response. Even the hate mail seemed a bit wan and pro-forma. The authors’ hearts clearly weren’t really into it.

I don’t know what this means. Vanity would prompt me to think, “I am the greatest writer in the world and I wrote the best article in history, that’s why everyone loved it.” But narcissism is never your friend when you’re trying to figure out why people are doing strange things that you did not expect them to do. That wasn’t the best or the most important thing I’ve ever written. I pretty much dashed it off. I didn’t do any research in the archives or sweat blood over the prose.

Still, I figure a quarter of a million people will have read it by the end of the week.

When last I checked the records at the Bodleian, I discovered that no one–literally not one single soul–had ever checked my doctoral thesis out of the library. I don’t think anyone has ever purchased it, either. I’m pretty sure this is not because my doctoral thesis wasn’t as good as that article. I’d like to think it was quite a bit better, actually. If not, I sure wasted a lot of time.

When something connects with readers this much, it says something about the audience, not the writer. So I’m wondering, hopefully: Perhaps this reaction means we’ve passed peak hysteria? Maybe it means people are truly longing to have a bit of common sense back?

I sure hope so. Because if you were to read all the mail I’ve received since I published that article, you’d weep. Hundreds of letters–most, but not all, from men–expressing sentiments no one in a free society should even have the vocabulary to express.

Some of the people who wrote were quite prominent, but most were, I think, just ordinary guys–guys who are now so scared of women, so broken-hearted, so baffled, that I wish I could just teleport them off our planet to a sane place where women are kind to them and the rules about sex are clear. That seems to be all they want, and it hardly seems an unreasonable demand. From one such letter:

Every rejection, every break-up, every dissolution of a union and you die a little more inside; less of a person, a broken wrecked empty shell of a man; weighed down by so many missed opportunities, so much baggage and misanthropic self-loathing. I had a fiancée once – then she cheated on me and I was never quite right after that. They say you grow with each relationship, but I’d argue the opposite; with each you lose a part of yourself, until nothing more than a torso with a head flopping around on the muddy ground.

Being accused of sexual harassment on the other hand for starting a conversation – or even the paranoid fear of this happening – would be life destroying. I respect women (the best relationships I’ve had have all been FLR); I love women, I hold all of them in such high regard; as an atheist, to be seen positively by a woman is to glimpse the face of God – and it is precisely for that reason that rejection or a negative reaction is so debilitating. It tells the person being rejected they are worthless garbage. Now, however, it also comes with a (possible) side order of accusations of being a harasser.

The price and danger of speaking with a woman has changed from being humiliated in public and having one’s self-esteem wiped out (which as much as I hate it, I have always begrudgingly accepted as the price men must pay in order to date – you want to have a relationship, fine, then be prepared to suffer excruciatingly for it or accept soul crushing loneliness), to now facing vitriolic accusations, extreme pillorying, and possible arrest.

Try to empathise with this fact – the current climate takes a pre-existing instinctive horror, found in nice but shy men, and multiplies it by 10,000 burning suns. It’s days like these I honestly wish I were a gay man. So much easier (based on observing the lives of gay friends). Heterosexual men have the hardest time. Of all the options available to us in life, none are without some kind of judgement by others and a prolonged feeling of agony. It’s honestly no wonder I drink so much.

What can I say? Yes, I did write back to tell him to take women off that pedestal–we’re no substitute for God.

The piece received very little of the criticism I expected. Only a couple of death threats, and these were from readers who were furious at my suggestion that the Trump presidency might be a source of general social anxiety. (I think they might be missing the point, or a bit too deep in their bubble — whether or not you think his presidency should be a source of anxiety, it’s incontrovertible that for many Americans, it is a source of anxiety. Receiving their messages sure didn’t reduce mine.)

One criticism I saw repeatedly is that I failed to appreciate what this was really about: equal opportunity in the workplace. I was referred, for example, to this article by Rebecca Traister, called “This Moment Isn’t (Just) About Sex.”

I read it closely. I genuinely, deeply disagree with her. For example, she writes,

What makes women vulnerable is not their carnal violability, but rather the way that their worth has been understood as fundamentally erotic, ornamental; that they have not been taken seriously as equals; that they have been treated as some ancillary reward that comes with the kinds of power men are taught to reach for and are valued for achieving. How to make clear that the trauma of the smaller trespasses — the boob grabs and unwanted kisses or come-ons from bosses — is not necessarily even about the sexualized act in question; so many of us learned to maneuver around hands-y men without sustaining lasting emotional damage when we were 14.

Rather, it’s about the cruel reminder that these are still the terms on which we are valued, by our colleagues, our bosses, sometimes our competitors, the men we tricked ourselves into thinking might see us as smart, formidable colleagues or rivals, not as the kinds of objects they can just grab and grope and degrade without consequence. It’s not that we’re horrified like some Victorian damsel; it’s that we’re horrified like a woman in 2017 who briefly believed she was equal to her male peers but has just been reminded that she is not, who has suddenly had her comparative powerlessness revealed to her. “I was hunting for a job,” said one of the women who accused Charlie Rose of assault. “And he was hunting for me.”

My response is that there is no contradiction between seeing oneself as smart and formidable and seeing oneself as an object of male attraction. They are not mutually exclusive. It is not a “cruel” thing to be reminded that one is a woman. Depending on the circumstances, it may certainly be awkward. It may require telling someone, “No.” If that doesn’t work, we are then in clear criminal territory, and of course I support laws against rape, or any similar bodily violation, and the enforcement of those laws.

But there is nothing about learning one’s colleagues find you attractive that should negate a woman’s self-esteem. It is entirely possible for a man to see a woman as smart and formidable and therefore desirable. Inherent to Ms. Traister’s argument is something like a Madonna-whore dichotomy–the very form of thought that feminists have long noted and deplored. If your male peers see you sexual, in her view, then they must not respect you.

But this is not so.

Of course it depends what kind of grabbing and groping we’re talking about — in her article she mentions accounts of rape in the workplace, which obviously is not in any kind of ambiguous grey zone, no less the zone I describe in my article. But an unwanted kiss? A hint that an employee may also have “erotic” or “ornamental” attributes in addition to her professional skills? There is no reason for any woman to feel degraded by this, unless she herself is insecure about her value as an employee.

By such logic, I would observe that even though I’ve spent my life thinking and writing about foreign policy, nothing I’ve written about foreign policy has ever made as much of a splash as an article I wrote about sex: I would thus be horrified. But I’m not. I get it. Sex sells. It will always sell. I chose to write about this, and now I’m going to go back to writing about foreign policy, because that’s a more important use of my time.

I do not feel horrified at the discovery that I can become very popular, very quickly, by writing about sex. I don’t think this entails I am only valuable to my readers when I write about sex. I think it entails that as always, sex is on everyone’s mind. And if I can use this fact to direct people’s attention to more important concerns — like Europe and the future of NATO — that’s a bonus, not an insult.

It’s not just men who are afraid. I’ve received many letters from women, too, who are deeply worried about what this will mean for us. They agree with me. The backlash will be terrible for women as a professional class. Any woman with an ounce of sense can see where this inevitably leads: strict sexual segregation. The number of men who have written to me that they now refuse to be alone with a woman unless there are witnesses is chilling. This is a Puritan, reactionary movement, dressed up as feminism.

To be clear, I was unnerved by all the attention that article received, even though it was overwhelmingly positive. But I was unnerved because of what it says about America right now, not because of what it says about me. It doesn’t seem healthy that Americans are thinking so much about this. I’m still at the top of The American Interest’s “trending” list. My article is sitting next to Adam Garfinkle’s reflections on the significance of the US recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. He is a wonderful, deeply learned writer. Anything he has to say about Jerusalem is by definition more important than anything I have to say about sexual hysteria and moral panics. But readers are clicking on my article instead of his.

I appreciate that sex sells, but since when does Jerusalem fail to sell? What does this mean about the degree to which we’ve become insular and inward-dwelling?

I’d usually complain that far too much media attention was going toward Jerusalem–as opposed to all the other parts of the world that require attention. Yet it seems to me aberrant that Americans who read The American Interest, which is, after all, a foreign policy journal, would not first click on Adam’s article. His is a lot more important, in the big scheme of things.

Or maybe, as I wrote to Adam, “it’s for the better that the world is so busy being obsessed with sex that it forgets to be obsessed with Jews.”

Anyway, that’s all I want to say about this subject. I’m now going to go back to thinking about Europe and the future of liberal democracy.

Finis.

Tags: ,

There are 93 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
Join Ricochet
  1. Dominique Prynne Member
    Dominique Prynne

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    Because let’s face it, it’s only “harassment” if you don’t want him.

    Yep! Or, she wants him initially, but then she decides she doesn’t want him. How in the world do men navigate through this??? When any misguided flirt or clumsy compliment can quickly turn into a cry of sexual harassment?

    • #31
    • December 12, 2017, at 2:35 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  2. Percival Thatcher
    PercivalJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Front Seat Cat (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    You were writing about what has become the most profound of foreign policies.

    I said “that’s a nice dress.” I did not say “take it off.” I did not say “I want to wear one just like it.”

    I have begun to understand why Victorian gentlemen retired after dinner for cigars and brandy without the ladies present. They weren’t discussing things they didn’t want the womenfolk to hear. They were depressurizing.

    Bring back the cigar and brandy ritual?

    It’s just that whenever a male-dominated domain is discovered, some social justice warriorette types descend upon it and insist on being included. And having made entry, they start changing it.

    • #32
    • December 12, 2017, at 2:51 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 6 likes
  3. Percival Thatcher
    PercivalJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Zafar (View Comment):
    The last moral panic involved Satan worshippers in the nation’s day care centers in the 1980s. What are the similarities between then and now?

    What about global warming? Whoops, I mean climate change.

    • #33
    • December 12, 2017, at 2:53 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 3 likes
  4. Archibald Campbell Member
    Archibald CampbellJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    ToryWarWriter (View Comment):
    The rest are Sans Culottes.

    You mean they’re not wearing those shorts women wear that from a distance look like a skirt?

    • #34
    • December 12, 2017, at 2:58 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  5. Archibald Campbell Member
    Archibald CampbellJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I taught my daughter to have a policy, as I call it, have the lines ready to go. We practiced them.

    I have three daughters, and this sounds like a good idea. Please advise.

    • #35
    • December 12, 2017, at 2:59 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 3 likes
  6. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil FawltyJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Percival (View Comment):

    Zafar (View Comment):
    The last moral panic involved Satan worshippers in the nation’s day care centers in the 1980s. What are the similarities between then and now?

    What about global warming? Whoops, I mean climate change.

    The most recent moral panic involves Trump.

    • #36
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:01 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  7. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat

    Great article (both of them). What you sense Claire is right on target in many ways. I agree with most of it. The guy that wrote the sad letter is wrongly looking for validation of himself in how women treat him – bad idea, as it is for women. To hang so much of this on Trump is in error. Clinton, an 8 year president, was 1000 times worse and deserved impeachment. His preoccupations put our country’s security at risk and he is a serial offender, going back to Arkansas. Yet none of this me too stuff came out – why? I want to think about that. A bigger picture is unfolding here – and you, me (and everyone) should be concerned. Outstanding writing! (minus the F word – give me a break). Can’t wait for your book!

    • #37
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:02 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 3 likes
  8. Nanda Panjandrum Inactive
    Nanda Panjandrum

    Front Seat Cat (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    You were writing about what has become the most profound of foreign policies.

    I said “that’s a nice dress.” I did not say “take it off.” I did not say “I want to wear one just like it.”

    I have begun to understand why Victorian gentlemen retired after dinner for cigars and brandy without the ladies present. They weren’t discussing things they didn’t want the womenfolk to hear. They were depressurizing.

    Bring back the cigar and brandy ritual?

    Don’t forget, the ladies had their own version of this: the [with]drawing room. Card table, books, needlework – cordials and conversation – were enjoyed after dinner, too.

    • #38
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:05 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  9. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    Archie Campbell (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I taught my daughter to have a policy, as I call it, have the lines ready to go. We practiced them.

    I have three daughters, and this sounds like a good idea. Please advise.

    Good for you. There are different scenarios to prepare for:

    -It’s your work and he’s above you, or he’s prof and you’re a student (this one happened to me in college)

    1. “I’m so flattered, but I have a boyfriend.”

    2. I’m so flattered, but we’re working together and I have a strict policy against this.”

    3. You’re married, you douchebag (haha)

    ……………..

    -It’s a guy you already know but don’t feel that way for:

    1. I’m so flattered! But your friendship is one of the most precious things in my life.

    2. I’m so flattered! Do you need a ride? (then he asks where to, and you say: Back to that Friend Zone you just tried to get out of.)

    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

    -It’s a guy at work but not your boss:

    1. I’m so flattered, but I have a boyfriend

    2. (if he knows you don’t have a boyfriend): I’m so flattered but I’m not dating right now.

    3. I’m so flattered, but we’re working together and I have a strict policy against this.”

    4. No.
    ………………………………

    • #39
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:11 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 8 likes
  10. Archibald Campbell Member
    Archibald CampbellJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Claire, I think the reason your piece was so popular, aside from its subject matter, is that it was a thoughtful and contemplative recognition of reality. It was the antithesis of the reactive drivel we’re deluged with after all of the Big Events. You “restated the obvious”, as Orwell would recognize the term, and did it beautifully.

    For a more rock-throwing and firebrand-y version of some of the things you said, I’m hoping that we hear from Camille Paglia soon. It should be entertainingly scathing.

    • #40
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:11 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  11. Archibald Campbell Member
    Archibald CampbellJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Thanks, @rightangles! These are good and practical lines.

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    -It’s a guy you already know but don’t feel that way for:

    1. I’m so flattered! But your friendship is one of the most precious things in my life.

    2. I’m so flattered! Do you need a ride? (then he asks where to, and you say: Back to that Friend Zone you just tried to get out of.)

    Number 1 is the only one of your list that may be insufficient, and require the deployment of 2, since guys always think they can, at some point, convert friendship into romance. 2 seems cruel, but will probably prove necessary.

    • #41
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:21 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 4 likes
  12. Percival Thatcher
    PercivalJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I’m so flattered! Do you need a ride? (then he asks where to, and you say: Back to that Friend Zone you just tried to get out of.)

    • #42
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:57 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 3 likes
  13. Ontheleftcoast Member
    Ontheleftcoast

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    I’d be willing to bet that the issue of powerful men abusing women was brought front-and-center to the public mind by a Clinton-Trump campaign, and under circumstances likely to intensify feelings of cognitive dissonance.

    1. There are a lot of males behaving in disgusting ways.
    2. It was fine with the Left as long as they were winning, unless it was a Republican or other political enemy, in which case it was a way to gain political advantage.
    3. The Left thought victory was in its grasp. Hillary would consolidate the Left’s domination of the administrative state and expand the administrative state, pack the judiciary, and so on.
    4. Then some [CoC] orange haired hobbit cut Shelob’s web, dragged her victim to temporary safety and drove her from her rightful prey.

    That’s not just cognitive dissonance, that’s the rage of frustrated entitlement.

    • #43
    • December 12, 2017, at 3:59 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  14. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat

    Nanda Panjandrum (View Comment):

    Front Seat Cat (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    You were writing about what has become the most profound of foreign policies.

    I said “that’s a nice dress.” I did not say “take it off.” I did not say “I want to wear one just like it.”

    I have begun to understand why Victorian gentlemen retired after dinner for cigars and brandy without the ladies present. They weren’t discussing things they didn’t want the womenfolk to hear. They were depressurizing.

    Bring back the cigar and brandy ritual?

    Don’t forget, the ladies had their own version of this: the [with]drawing room. Card table, books, needlework – cordials and conversation – were enjoyed after dinner, too.

    somehow that sounds relaxing!

    • #44
    • December 12, 2017, at 4:48 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  15. Basil Fawlty Member
    Basil FawltyJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Nanda Panjandrum (View Comment):
    Don’t forget, the ladies had their own version of this: the [with]drawing room. Card table, books, needlework – cordials and conversation – were enjoyed after dinner, too.

    Who the heck did the dishes?

    • #45
    • December 12, 2017, at 4:59 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  16. James Gawron Thatcher
    James GawronJoined in the first year of Ricochet Ricochet Charter Member

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):

    Nanda Panjandrum (View Comment):
    Don’t forget, the ladies had their own version of this: the [with]drawing room. Card table, books, needlework – cordials and conversation – were enjoyed after dinner, too.

    Who the heck did the dishes?

    Basil,

    Wow, that’s an easy one. Hattie McDaniel who else. The modern woman has made such progress.

    Regards,

    Jim

    • #46
    • December 12, 2017, at 5:10 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • Like
  17. Nanda Panjandrum Inactive
    Nanda Panjandrum

    Basil Fawlty (View Comment):
    Who the heck did the dishes?

    Ever watch “Upstairs/Downstairs”?

    • #47
    • December 12, 2017, at 5:24 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  18. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    @claire Tucker Carlson just quoted extensively from your article on his show.

    • #48
    • December 12, 2017, at 5:27 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  19. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    Post author

    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”

    Women need to be prepared to bring out that one–the heavy bazooka–more often than many of them realize. It’s honest, it’s appropriate, and if it doesn’t shut it down stone cold, then yeah — you’ve got a real problem on your hands, and the next step is Human Resources. And firearms.

    • #49
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:42 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 7 likes
  20. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    Post author

    Hear, hear.

    • #50
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:45 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  21. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”

    Women need to be prepared to bring out that one–the heavy bazooka–more often than many of them realize. It’s honest, it’s appropriate, and if it doesn’t shut it down stone cold, then yeah — you’ve got a real problem on your hands, and the next step is Human Resources. And firearms.

    It’s just so hard to say something like that! Gah!

    • #51
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:46 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  22. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    Post author

    @claire Tucker Carlson just quoted extensively from your article on his show.
    @rightangles He did? Where? Do you think I can find a clip?

    • #52
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:47 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 2 likes
  23. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    @claire Tucker Carlson just quoted extensively from your article on his show.
    @rightangles He did? Where? Do you think I can find a clip?

    I’m sure I can find it. Stay tuned.

    • #53
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:47 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  24. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    Post author

    RightAngles
    Edit
    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”
    Women need to be prepared to bring out that one–the heavy bazooka–more often than many of them realize. It’s honest, it’s appropriate, and if it doesn’t shut it down stone cold, then yeah — you’ve got a real problem on your hands, and the next step is Human Resources. And firearms.
    It’s just so hard to say something like that! Gah!

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. Practice. I think men *and* women prefer to know where they really stand than to linger on making hopeful fools of themselves. Men have said it to me. I haven’t loved it, obviously, but I’ve sure respected them for saying it.

    • #54
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:49 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 4 likes
  25. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    Here it is: He calls it brilliant. I copied the URL from the start of the segment. He mentions you after the intro: @claire

    https://youtu.be/wAskeqNhVkI?t=1185

    • #55
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:51 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 6 likes
  26. Doctor Bass Monkey Inactive
    Doctor Bass Monkey

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    RightAngles
    Edit
    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”
    Women need to be prepared to bring out that one–the heavy bazooka–more often than many of them realize. It’s honest, it’s appropriate, and if it doesn’t shut it down stone cold, then yeah — you’ve got a real problem on your hands, and the next step is Human Resources. And firearms.
    It’s just so hard to say something like that! Gah!

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. Practice. I think men *and* women prefer to know where they really stand than to linger on making hopeful fools of themselves. Men have said it to me. I haven’t loved it, obviously, but I’ve sure respected them for saying it.

    You get to a certain age where you get tired of the games and just want a straight answer to know if you’re wasting your time.

    • #56
    • December 12, 2017, at 8:54 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 6 likes
  27. Midget Faded Rattlesnake Contributor
    Midget Faded Rattlesnake

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”

    It’s just so hard to say something like that! Gah!

    Especially if the first signal you received* that the guy was interested in you was him awkwardly groping you in an intimate area out of the blue! It’s being able to say it in contexts that could easily render you speechless if you weren’t prepared that’s most difficult, especially when you’re all dewy-eyed and innocent.

    (I’m very grateful for some mutual guy friends who once sat a guy I knew down and explained to him, when you’re first expressing interest in a girl, keep it G-rated.)

    * it might not be the first signal he sent, or thought he sent, but especially if you’re an innocent, you might’ve missed earlier subtext

    • #57
    • December 12, 2017, at 9:18 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 4 likes
  28. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles

    Midget Faded Rattlesnake (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    Some men actually are dense enough that they need to hear, “I’m so flattered, but I’m afraid it’s not reciprocated. You’re just not my type. I’m not attracted to you at all. I just couldn’t feel that way about you even if I wanted to, and I don’t, because this is the workplace. I’m sorry, I know it must hurt your feelings, but I am just not attracted to you.”

    It’s just so hard to say something like that! Gah!

    Especially if the first signal you received* that the guy was interested in you was him awkwardly groping you in an intimate area out of the blue! It’s being able to say it in contexts that could easily render you speechless if you weren’t prepared that’s most difficult, especially when you’re all dewy-eyed and innocent.

    (I’m very grateful for some mutual guy friends who once sat a guy I knew down and explained to him, when you’re first expressing interest in a girl, keep it G-rated.)

    * it might not be the first signal he sent, or thought he sent, but especially if you’re an innocent, you might’ve missed earlier subtext

    Well those are the ones that are easy to tell off.

    • #58
    • December 12, 2017, at 9:20 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 1 like
  29. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Editor
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    Post author

    Thank you for finding that for me! Goodness, that’s a strange feeling — to realize something I basically dashed off for Ricochet became national news. Well, goes to show: You never know what’s going to connect with readers and what isn’t, and shouldn’t try to second-guess.

    • #59
    • December 12, 2017, at 10:41 PM PST
      • ⋅
    • 5 likes
  30. Ontheleftcoast Member
    Ontheleftcoast

    Here comes the next click of the ratchet:

    “Don’t vote for men!” is the message of a recent campaign ad. Issued by Dana Nessel, Democratic attorney general contender in Michigan, what she literally says is, “Who can you trust most not to show you their [sic] penis in a professional setting?”

    She answers that it’s the candidate who doesn’t have one…

    In 2004, Sweden’s Left Party (yeah, that’s its actual name) proposed a “Man Tax,” a special levy on men designed to compensate society for the cost of male violence…

    Speaking of which:

    USA Today recently ran the headline, “’Guns don’t kill people; men and boys kill people,’ experts say,” which is about as insightful as stating “Men are taller than women.” Of course, even though blacks and Hispanics commit 98 percent of all gun crime in NYC, we’d never see the headline “Big Apple Crime: Guns don’t kill people; blacks and Hispanics kill people, experts say.”

    Never let a good crisis go to waste when it comes to advancing the “progressive” agenda.

    • #60
    • December 13, 2017, at 1:12 AM PST
      • ⋅
    • 1 like

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.