Reaction towards Weinstein et al

Before we start, I should perhaps state two things.

1. The obvious. Forcing yourself onto someone else, or abusing power, is wrong. We all know that. This article will not be condoning such behaviour; it simply examines the reaction of the public, media and film industry towards it all.
2. At the time this article was written, no accusation in what I will call the "Weinstein wave" (including US and UK incidences) of sexual allegations has yet gone to court. Louis CK has only just admitted his part in it. This article will still be relevant after it's all been cleared up in the courts, regardless of whether they were found innocent or guilty, although some of it may obviously be out of date.

Now then, to my point. My understanding was that, in civilised countries, people were innocent until proven guilty. There is no half way on that: Either you think the principle right, or you think it's always wrong, and it applies to everyone equally. The general consensus throughout history is that this principle is the right way to go, and I presume it's safe to say most people overwhelmingly adhere to it.

I can understand why certain US and UK TV programmes, and Hollywood films, are being withdrawn in light of accusations against the likes of Ed Westwick, Louis CK, Kevin Spacey et al: People would feel uneasy watching them under the circumstances, and they're unlikely either to be popular or to make the distributors popular.

The news media, on the other hand, have done much to make it look as if these people are guilty, and there's no excuse. As far as I can see, they've crossed way beyond the line of journalism (to report the facts as they honestly see them in an undetached way).

Let's ignore the fact that merely naming someone implicated in something condemns them straight away in the public eye, whether innocent or guilty. Just consider these sorts of recent headlines, which are created by news outlets and which seem to imply guilt from the outset:

• I woke up with Kevin Spacey lying on me
• To Kevin Spacey: Shame on you for what you did to my son
• Kevin Spacey groped me
• Kevin Spacey 'cuddles and massages' model half his age in LA park in newly-uncovered photos
• Harvey Weinstein timeline: How the scandal unfolded

People scan headlines. They haven't got time to read entire articles. What impression would you get from the ones above? News vendors know the likely reaction, and that surely makes it character assassination at best. Why not at least use the word "allegedly" once in a while?

Another thing to note is the use of the word "scandal" in the last news link above. A scandal is a discreditable action, offence, etc. The obvious question is - what scandal are they referring to? No discreditable action, offence, etc. has been proven yet. Is that not a slanderous statement? Or indeed a scandalous one?

Even then, the way the stories are presented, and told from one side of the story, does little in my mind to make it feel like actual news is being reported. Instead, it feels like a titillating entertainment article written at someone else's expense (who may or may not be guilty). Is that fair? Or even legal?

Let's move on to the Louis CK case. His statement, in which he admits the five allegations, makes a good point. From his explanation, I do not believe Louis CK is an intrinsically-bad person. Instead, he let his weakness get the better of him. The weakness, as he points out in a round-about way, is that his hormones kicked in, he spotted an opportunity to gain advantage over a situation in which he could get sexual gratification, and he succumbed to it. They did not complain at the time, and so he perhaps (again at the time) thought of it merely as harmless fun. Testosterone is a powerful force. Similar might be integral to the other cases, although they appear to be more serious in nature, and perhaps there were additional sinister things that came into play.

That's not to say the actions of these men were right, of course. It's merely to try to explain WHY it happened, which I would argue is one of the most positive, important things that can come out of these allegations. And I think most men would be capable of doing the same in the same situation. You might think, "OK, Alan, so you'd do the same?" My answer, which would be the same for other men, would be that there's no way of knowing unless we're in the same situation. I think it's safe to say that men cannot be trusted from the outset in that situation to do the right thing, without a strong system of regulation, openness and mutual self-checking. Being men, we have a strong enough sexuality that it may sometimes not be possible to resist and express sexuality in these ways.

I don't think it's fair to say men are the only humans that can't be trusted to avoid abusing power, given the opportunity. I think women are just as bad. It's just that women don't express sexuality in the same way, not because they are somehow better or more grown-up than men, but because either they are less sexual or their sexuality is expressed differently.

Ignoring sexuality for a moment, women have slipped under the radar so far because there have been far fewer acts of power abuse reported from them, but that may simply be because far more men have the power. It's an unfair test, and an abuse of statistics. From what I have seen, women just as ably abuse positions of power. I know male managers in companies can be just as bad, but I have rarely known a female manager not to be overbearing, difficult and spiteful. I have also rarely talked to anyone (male or female) who has experienced the contrary. It seems to me, in a very generalised sense, that women can't handle power, while men are too dominated by testosterones to be trusted with it.

Clearly, we know very little about the nature of human sexuality in men and women, and the huge differences between them. As I've said, testosterone is a powerful force. It's understandably misunderstood by women, who possess nowhere near the same levels. What isn't so acceptable is that men don't speak up about something that is a natural part of them, and that women seem to choose to look down on men (ego) for it, rather than seeing that it's something beyond their comprehension (humility).

So what is to be done about all this? Understanding is the key to solving these problems and making the world safer and better for everyone. Understanding the nature of sexuality, and particularly the potency of testosterone, is essential for both men and women.

Otherwise, if children can't be trusted to look after their toys, the best thing to do is to take them away. It's part punishment, part rational act to avoid the inevitable tears. "Adults" are just children who have been told they've grown up. The more power they're given -- and the more they think they can get away with -- the more they revert to a selfish, child-like state. So the solutions seem to be:

1. Regulate, police and monitor what people in power can do
2. Limit the amount of power any one person can have
3. Find a superior, moral (but not equally power-crazed) alien race to take over the job of regulating humans.

Personally, I for one would embrace our alien overlords. In the meantime, let's hope we don't continue to keep quiet about addressing the subject for fear of being labelled scandalously by the media. By that, I don't just mean victims speaking out when abuse occurs. I also mean addressing why it occurs, in a mature, non-knee-jerk, unbiased and measured way. Understanding is the key, and the only way to resolve problems. Now is not the time for female chauvinism to flourish.