The article starts off on the wrong foot and there the article ends.
Do you think that 'government' (and ie anyone that works for one) is any 'different' to anyone else? Or are we all people? Or maybe there are other descriptors?
Wanting privacy is not a crime or admission of guilt.
Note - the EU politicians exempt themselves from this surveillance under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy.
You and your family do not.
After the MeToo allegations, his contributions have been removed—or at least significantly downplayed—in Disney and Pixar’s accounts of Pixar’s origins.
Hm, the fact that he was mentioned or referenced does not prove that his role was downplayed, a quick search of the interwebs shows:
- 2018 Oscars: Despite his massive influence on Coco, none of the filmmakers mentioned him by name in their acceptance speeches for Best Animated Feature.
- Film Premieres: Lasseter did not attend the 2018 premiere of Incredibles 2, a film he was heavily involved in, further signaling his detachment from official company events.
His involvement in both those films was as member of the brain trust. The brain trust consists of all their prior directors.
Go back through their many Oscar wins and they don’t thank the brain trust members individually. They don’t thank their department heads either who are more involved than any members of the brain trust are.
I think you are the one who is perhaps overplaying his involvement in those specific films without a concrete understanding of what his contributions were.
With guys who are in prestigious/powerful corporate positions, I wonder if there is a fundamental issue where everybody tends to brown nose them, but female brown nosing sometimes gets misinterpreted as flirtation and interest.
And because guys in these sorts of positions actually do get an overpowered amount of real interest from women, they may have a harder time detecting inauthentic interest-alias
than say a random janitor guy who a woman is being artificially nice to for some reason.
And then if the guy mistakenly thinks the woman is interested and makes a move, the woman may then in the moment feel unsure about what to do, because an abrupt rejection that contradicts their earlier outward behavior may make them feel not good, they might feel like they caused it, etc (which I think lines up with accounts I’ve read, except they don’t mention the brown nosing part of the theorized pattern).
This doesn’t excuse anything, necessarily, I just wonder if there are some complex dynamics at play. This setup we have where sexual relations are at will, subject only to consent, is not that old, so it wouldn’t be surprising if the system as-is still produces very bad outcomes at times even if the parties involved are all behaving in a non-psychopathic way.
Nobody is saying it’s acceptable. Are we unable to have discussions about the causes of bad things, or do we just have to frown and say they are bad over and over again?
I’m not sure how that goes against what I said? If the man is confused and thinks the woman is very interested in him (again because he is confused), that could absolutely happen. I guarantee it’s happened in other cases where the two have gone on to happily date or marry. The only difference would be that in those cases the man wasn’t confused about the woman’s interest.
There's a reason this stuff is illegal. The person being groped is effectively helpless since the person doing the groping is in a position of power over their life.
It really doesn't matter if the boss is confused. Someone with a position of power over another should not do this period. The person being groped risks their job if they speak up.
The problem with your hypothesis is that 'a woman being nice to you' (brown-nosing or otherwise) is in absolutely no way whatsoever flirting. Flirting is an entirely different way of behaving.
Men also sometimes misinterpret waitresses as flirting with them when they aren’t, which is another common entry point for sexual harassment. What I’m describing would be similar to that. Would you say that doesn’t happen either, or are they somehow completely different?
Yeah, sure, the plot of The Hot Chick is totally imaginary and not used as a satire on the behaviour of some people. Especially in those scenes at the cafe. Yes.
The physical nature of being on foot, using your eyes to find compositions, and feeling the weight of a camera in your hand all contribute to that difference, that makes these changes rewarding. I am reading a lot of comments involve physical objects and the outdoors.
