Nothing is perfect, including #MeToo, but #MeToo forcefully addressed the issue of what happens to women when they are sexually harassed and abused in such a way that it is difficult to prove it. Predators have practice and prey are ambushed. The United States was always Canada's bolder and braver counterpart. The Americans fight for what they believe in. Canadians try to maneuver and appease to steal away what they can. When Donald Trump called Canadians "smooth", he was letting them know he sees the gambit, and isn't impressed by it.
#MeToo is an un-Canadian movement, and that is unfortunate. Canadians do not like confrontation. They do not like to admit there is a problem. If everyone just shuts up and endures, then the façade is good enough.
#MeToo was the admission in the United States that all was not well. You have highly educated women in positions of real power who were cornered the same way the high school drop-out waitress was cornered by a superior. The women who who spoke out did not want to do so. They did not want people who wished them ill to get any pleasure knowing they were down because those same people are going to gleefully make jabs that the story is either a lie, or the woman did something to earn her abuse.
No civilized society can tolerate that.
#MeToo used social media in a novel way, and it did so because the courts are rigged in such a way that victims and accusers are not even afterthoughts. Most of the measures of guilt or innocence are not even scientific or empirical. There are a lot of assumptions based on folksy logic, nothing more, and there is also the assumption that the only way to determine guilt or innocence is for an accused to be innocent until proven guilty.
If you object, then, of course, people jump down your throat, and assume you want people to be assumed guilty until proven innocent, and that isn't the case.
We need a system that makes no assumptions one way or the other. We have never quite gotten out of our binary reflexes.
#MeToo's longevity is thanks in part to the fact women are not served in the justice system, and nothing has changed.
But to the National Post, the women who dare challenge an Establishment is a horrible, terrible thing.
As soon as there was a tiny lull, they pounced again, trying to reclaim the narrative that the status quo is glorious because women cannot be trusted to tell the truth, using the UK as an example.
Who cares what another country does? We are dealing with our country. Canadian women do not file reports or press charges over there.
It is an attempt at misdirection: let's look everywhere else but our own nation. We have a justice system that has no understanding of the dynamics of abuse.
For starters, there is a base assumption that if a woman goes back to an abuser, there was no abuse. There was no crime.
If that is the case, then husbands who murder the wives they have beaten shouldn't get charged because, hey, she lived with the guy; ergo there was no abuse or crime.
Of course there was abuse and crime. I don't care if someone goes back. We need to establish why people go back, and we do have clues. We see it with cults. We know there are economic factors. We know about grooming and priming. We know about cultural expectations. We know about habit formation.
We have to stop focussing on irrelevant details and start asking simple questions: did you hit her at this point in time?
And then start asking more questions from there.
We cannot have a functional justice system unless we have a better understanding of human behaviour, and we don't.
Because we have journalists who aren't schooled in psychology. You cannot proclaim to study people and then be utterly clueless to how people actually think and behave.
The National Post is a depressing read: there is no connect to humanity in its pages. It is pure seething sophistry trying to prop up things that need to be questioned.
You do not have a static system and then expect progress or improvement. Women are dealing with the same basic justice system that was around when they were still considered properties of their husbands.
And that's a serious problem.
But the Post has decided to be apologists for rot and ignorance. They have a serious women issue because of it.
If you are going to proclaim to be a chronicler of reality, then you have to start dealing with the whole of reality.
And the reality is you have too many people who are being abused with no true recourse to correct it...