But that's okay.
She's allowed to have her point of view and he's not going to speak for her on that.
So, young men of the #metoo generation, here is your takeaway from this, as brought to you by a leading feminist and the Prime Minister of Canada:
You're going to do things that women are going to misinterpret, because, well, they see things differently. They think that if you wouldn't touch a guy in the same situation, then you shouldn't be touching them. I know... dramatic, right? But still.
Reflect on that. You'll probably come to the conclusion that you did nothing inappropriate because if you thought it was inappropriate, you wouldn't have done it, right? You are the arbiter of your truth. You know you're not that kind of guy. She might not be making it up, she's just misinterpreting your moves.
She might accuse you anyway. That's okay. Give the lady permission to feel how she feels, because well, you know women -- especially professional women (the other ones you can use situational judgment, but hey, if they're working when they say you did the deed, acknowledge that you maybe did or did not offend them, but that you're pretty sorry that you forgot to note their employment situation.) Let them know you're alright with them being wrong. You've thought about it, and it's okay.
In the end, just be aware... so long as you are confident you did nothing inappropriate (which of course you are, because you're not that kind of guy, right?) you're in the clear (if you're fortunate enough that the woman just wants to put it all behind her).
It's 2018. It's time we realized that men and women are different, view things differently and when there is a discrepancy of memory, so long as you are confident that she's just wrong, and you reflect on that, you'll be fine.
I could say, okay... you've learned, you get it, if Justin Trudeau had said:
I was young and drunk and I really don't remember. I know myself and I feel like I wouldn't have done anything to offend this woman, and obviously I wouldn't have if I'd realized it would offend her. I'm still not exactly sure what happened, but obviously it upset her enough that she brought it forward, therefore, I apologize unreservedly because whatever my feelings on the situation are, it was obviously a negative interaction for her. If I was not truly sorry then because I was not aware enough of how this might affect her, I have grown as a man, as a husband and a father, and I am truly sorry now that whatever my actions were, that they caused her to feel discomfort and disrespect. It is not the person I am now, and I would like to say that it is not the person I ever was, but I accept this woman's version of events as truth, and offer my sincerest apology. In the future, I will be more sensitive to both women and men, accusers and the accused. I have been short sighted and unfair in my rush to judge others. I apologize for this also.
As it stands, he's practically dared a woman who has asked for privacy to challenge him.
She said her piece 18 years ago. This is not someone coming out of the woodwork 18 years later and accusing when things are murky. This is someone who reported an incident immediately in a generation that was not yet woke to sexual harassment. She shouldn't have to come forward again, and if he'd have just have given the tiniest acknowledgement that he MIGHT have done something that could be perceived as untoward, I could accept it.
These are not the words or actions of a feminist in 2018.
canadianna
6 comments:
I might be inclined to cut him a bit of slack were it not for his nasty habit of pushing his MPs under the bus at the least hint of impropriety. But between that, his appropriation of feminism, and his all-round arrogance, I say he has to follow the rules he has inflicted on others.
You're right, Frances. He's been quick to ruin other men's careers. It's amazing how many people want to give him a pass. For me, it's no longer about the original incident. It's all about his obfuscations and hypocrisy.
Actually, Canadianna, I seriously think that JT has no idea why his actions that day caused offense. He's an anointed one, so he believes that anyone on whom he confers his attentions - in whatever manner - should be properly grateful at being honoured with said attentions.
A well argued post. This in particular: "For me, it's no longer about the original incident. It's all about his obfuscations and hypocrisy."
-- Gabby in QC
What's this cut him some slack stuff? This is a political opportunity to take him down. Do you think if the tables were turned you'd have leftists hand wringing about cutting slack? More like cutting throats.
That's so true, Frances... he is the personification of privilege.
Gabby! Thank you. Always nice to see you here :)
Anonymous - People make mistakes. It's only when they refuse to take ownership of them that it becomes a real problem. I have no desire to see a man's career ruined because he got a little handsy years ago. I do believe that his original apology lacked remorse, and that everything that has happened with regard to this since May is indicative of his character so I have no sympathy. I cut people slack because I'm not perfect. I was willing to see how this played out, if he could show a little grace... he didn't.
Post a Comment