# Gatti fired: allegations of sexual harassment



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

The chief conductor at Amsterdam's renowned Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, Daniele Gatti, has been fired because of allegations of sexual harassment. Story here.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

"Gatti was accused in the Post article of assaulting two women in his dressing rooms, one in Chicago and one in Bologna, Italy in the 1990s."
---
wow. So some 60+ years old women long past blossom now come out with a story and it is enough to fire him. The presumption of innocence (the gold standard of justice system) is no longer valid in the West.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

Art Rock said:


> The chief conductor at Amsterdam's renowned Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, Daniele Gatti, has been fired because of allegations of sexual harassment. Story here.


Now how am I going to listen to his recent and refined Mahler 2 and 4? Disgusting! It had hopes on his cycle!


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Jacck said:


> "Gatti was accused in the Post article of assaulting two women in his dressing rooms, one in Chicago and one in Bologna, Italy in the 1990s."
> ---
> wow. So some 60+ years old women long past blossom now come out with a story and it is enough to fire him. The presumption of innocence (the gold standard of justice system) is no longer valid in the West.


After the two cases in the 90s came out last week, several female members of the Concertgebouw orchestra have also reported 'inappropriate behaviour' (Dutch news).


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Jacck said:


> The presumption of innocence (the gold standard of justice system) is no longer valid in the West.


This is the last retreat of journalism, a ¨profession¨ unable to prove its worth with politics, the economy or whatever that matters, trying to prove that they are important in episodes that - as a fact - are nothing more than advertising, I mean, why the RCO fired Gatti? they will tour the US next year so they need to avoid even the hint of a blemish on their public image. This is advertising, it has nothing to do with morals/respect/whatever, in the real world and in real workplaces people continue to be harassed (men and women, sexually or not) every day as it has always been and as it will always be, like it or not that's human nature.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Madiel said:


> This is the last retreat of journalism, a ¨profession¨ unable to prove its worth with politics, the economy or whatever that matters, trying to prove that they are important in episodes that - as a fact - are nothing more than advertising, I mean, why the RCO fired Gatti? they will tour the US next year so they need to avoid even the hint of a blemish on their public image. This is advertising, it has nothing to do with morals/respect/whatever, in the real world and in real workplaces people continue to be harassed (men and women, sexually or not) every day as it has always been and as it will always be, like it or not that's human nature.


I suppose he should have been suspended pending investigation rather than fired. That he wasn't suggests to me that there is more to the story than is in the public domain. Perhaps he has admitted it or something like that. I imagine he would be in a position to sue if he is wrongly treated by his employer so I doubt his case was dealt with in any slapdash way.

I think it is worth my saying - as no-one else is - that the behaviour he is accused of is not easily forgiven or forgotten. It isn't merely sexual assault - that would be bad enough - because he is accused of acting from a position of power towards people who were under his power.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

.......................................................................


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> I think it is worth my saying - as no-one else is - that the behaviour he is accused of is not easily forgiven or forgotten. It isn't merely sexual assault - that would be bad enough - because he is accused of acting from a position of power towards people who were under his power.


What is sexual harrassment? It is all a matter of degree. Rape is on all accounts wrong and should be harshly punished. But when a man slaps women on her butt? Or when he opens doors for her? Is this really such a serious offence as to be punishable by a destroyed career and family and reputation? Normal male sexual behavior is now looked upon as harrassment (if the women wants to)
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0508e4da-2bb3-40e1-bf22-b2774e986c1f


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> What is sexual harrassment? It is all a matter of degree. Rape is on all accounts wrong and should be harshly punished. But when a man slaps women on her butt? Or when he opens doors for her? Is this really such a serious offence as to be punishable by a destroyed career and family and reputation? Normal male sexual behavior is now looked upon as harrassment (if the women wants to)
> https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=0508e4da-2bb3-40e1-bf22-b2774e986c1f


Opens a door? No, unless it is accompanied by some other objectionable behaviour, it isn't harassment. But a slap to the butt? Are you serious? It is deeply inappropriate unless clearly and unambiguously wanted and when it comes from the boss - the man who can fire you (and thereby condemn you to moving to another city or country!) with no better reason than that you don't fit in his orchestra - it is unforgivable. I can't imagine living in a world where all sorts of people felt it was OK to grope me or slap my butt just because they get a bit of a thrill (and also assert their dominance) from doing so. That is how women tell us they have been living and I can only agree with them (and nearly all of the men I know) that it is time for that to stop. How would you feel if a male or female boss, perhaps twenty years your senior, treated you like that?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Traverso said:


> Do we want a "clean"world in pursuing an ideal and denying what we are?
> 
> I understand that one can not work freely,at ease when the boss has loose hands.


Denying what we are? If the licence to grope women is an important aspect in who you are I think you should seek professional help. Try treating the opposite sex with respect: it won't ruin the world but it may lead you into deeper friendships.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> I think it is worth my saying - as no-one else is - that the behavior he is accused of is not easily forgiven or forgotten. It isn't merely sexual assault - that would be bad enough - because he is accused of acting from a position of power towards people who were under his power.


The fact remains: everyone is innocent until justice has proven that he is guilty.
Gatti is only the latest victim of a media bubble which is destroying careers of people that no justice system has proven guilty yet.
Newspapers are not tribunals, they are not even part of the justice system, they are nothing more than chit-chat and there is people being ruined by chit-chat.
The majority of people when they are in power tend to abuse that power (sexually and/or otherwise) and no media bubble will change human nature, you don't need to be a Berlusconi or a Weinstein to do that, every boss at whatever level does that.
The pointlessness of this media bubble and its subversive effect utterly disgusts me.

PS: I am only defending the primacy of the Law.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

If one of my friends in my field finds this forum and this thread in particular, I want to say that I don't hold accountable for most of the statements that I predict members are going to make. I have had a rough time to understand it too, and I have said and done many things I regret in my youth. Some collectives are done with "what we are" excuses and won't be stopped. The _"manada"_ affair has raised a lot of eyebrows in Spain.

*And Art Rock, congratulations for your 10.000 posts!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Opens a door? No, unless it is accompanied by some other objectionable behaviour, it isn't harassment. But a slap to the butt? Are you serious? It is deeply inappropriate unless clearly and unambiguously wanted and when it comes from the boss - the man who can fire you (and thereby condemn you to moving to another city or country!) with no better reason than that you don't fit in his orchestra - it is unforgivable. I can't imagine living in a world where all sorts of people felt it was OK to grope me or slap my butt just because they get a bit of a thrill (and also assert their dominance) from doing so. That is how women tell us they have been living and I can only agree with them (and nearly all of the men I know) that it is time for that to stop. How would you feel if a male or female boss, perhaps twenty years your senior, treated you like that?


it is definitely not a normal behavior for me, but I can imagine normal male sexual advances being misrepresented as sexual harrassment, if the woman wants to. And accusing someone of groping in a dressing room that allegedly happened 30 years ago? I cannot remember what happened 10 years ago.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> "Gatti was accused in the Post article of assaulting two women in his dressing rooms, one in Chicago and one in Bologna, Italy in the 1990s."
> ---
> wow. So some 60+ years old women long past blossom now come out with a story and it is enough to fire him. The presumption of innocence (the gold standard of justice system) is no longer valid in the West.


It is not a legal preceding and presumption of innocence does not apply. He can be fired if his tempo is too slow in Beethoven's ninth, he certainly can be fired for assaulting women in their dressing rooms without a jury trial. Management may have more information than has been made public. It is telling that you defend him by ridiculing the women as "long past blossom."


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Baron Scarpia said:


> It is not a legal preceding and presumption of innocence does not apply. He can be fired if his tempo is too slow in Beethoven's ninth, he certainly can be fired for assaulting women in their dressing rooms without a jury trial. Management may have more information than has been made public. It is telling that you defend him by ridiculing the women as "long past blossom."


because it actually makes me angry. Women complain 30 years after the incident that he groped them in a dressing room? Why come with it now? Attention seeking? Greed? Personal revenge? What is the motive? It is very easy to accuse someone and sometimes it can have consequences like this
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05/07/convictions-vacated-26-year-old-rape/588406002/


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Granate said:


> *And Art Rock, congratulations for your 10.000 posts!


Cool. Do I get a trophy or something?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> it is definitely not a normal behavior for me, but I can imagine normal male sexual advances being misrepresented as sexual harrassment, if the woman wants to. And accusing someone of groping in a dressing room that allegedly happened 30 years ago? I cannot remember what happened 10 years ago.


When I was a teenager I was sometimes uncertain if a girl would welcome or repel my advances. I learned to make my move if it seemed appropriate and not to worry too much if it turned out not to have been wanted. My first move was never to grope the poor woman, however, nor to slap her butt.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

..........................................................................


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

Art Rock said:


> Cool. Do I get a trophy or something?


Back in 2017 Taggart and Ingélou would have treated with a beautiful mountain pic, comic sans coulourful letters and a party gif. Have a beautiful picture of a "Patio" when I was on holiday in Córdoba, Spain.



















10.000 posts


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> When I was a teenager I was sometimes uncertain if a girl would welcome or repel my advances. I learned to make my move if it seemed appropriate and not to worry too much if it turned out not to have been wanted. My first move was never to grope the poor woman, however, nor to slap her butt.


I had women slapping my butt several times (seriously). Now I have a famale collegue at work, who always dresses very provocatively, comes 10cm within my distance and shows me her cleavage and boobs, or her panties with her miniskirt etc. It is a covert sexual behavior, unwanted. Women are teasing men, sometimes just for sport, and some more primitive males cannot control their impulses. There is a power imbalance in relationships just by the very fact, that men are expected to take the lead - to ask to women out, to make the first touch, the make the first kiss etc. And women are not obvious in their signals, but are often vague, hinting, teasing, playing mind games, confusing etc. A lot of women say no and acutally mean yes, because they want to be chased etc (no, this is not a myth, but a personal experience). And women on the whole are not more moral than men. Just in the west (especially the US), there is this anti-male campaign going on.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

There will no doubt be many more cases like this - we've seen Levine get into trouble - now this. How many conductors do you think would not use their position of power and authority over a female (or male) musician if it suited them?

I once spoke to a top female soloist and she said this sort of thing was rife - yet well concealed within the profession.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

Almost 50 years ago when I was foolish enough to think I could be a conductor, I met a rising star through a mutual friend. We were talking music over beers and I asked what it would take to get into the conducting biz. He looked at me in my cowboy hat and boots and said "Kid, there's a lot of c**ksucking in this business. You sure you want to do that?". That was it. Nope, not for me. With all the crap coming out about Levine, Dutoit, now Gatti, and others, seems the maestro was right. Certainly made my non-conducting career choice easier.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> because it actually makes me angry. Women complain 30 years after the incident that he groped them in a dressing room? Why come with it now? Attention seeking? Greed? Personal revenge? What is the motive? It is very easy to accuse someone and sometimes it can have consequences like this
> https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05/07/convictions-vacated-26-year-old-rape/588406002/


I read the story about Gatti. After publication of the article current female members of the Concertgebouw Orchestra felt empowered to report continued harassment. He wasn't fired because he slapped a woman's butt 30 years ago, he was fired because members of his orchestra reported ongoing sexual harassment. He was using his authority over the orchestra to sexually harass women. Termination of his employment is an entirely appropriate response, probably the only appropriate response.

The injustice in this instance is not that poor Gatti lost his job for slapping someone's butt 30 years ago. The injustice is that Gatti has evidently been harassing female musicians for 30 years and until now the victims knew that if they raised the issue management would get rid of them to protect Gatti. We can hope that we are entering a time when powerful people do not have liberty to sexually harass or assault those that they have power over.

The story you used as a comparison involved two men who were convicted of rape because they were employed selling illegal drugs and the drug dealer they worked for wanted to get rid of them and forced his girlfriend to accuse them of rape. It was wrongful conviction but the conspiracy did not originate with the woman who was the supposed victim. I don't see how it is related to the issue with Gatti.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I read the story about Gatti. After publication of the article current female members of the Concertgebouw Orchestra felt empowered to report continued harassment. He wasn't fired because he slapped a woman's butt 30 years ago, he was fired because members of his orchestra reported ongoing sexual harassment. He was using his authority over the orchestra to sexually harass women. Termination of his employment is an entirely appropriate response, probably the only appropriate response.
> 
> The injustice in this instance is not that poor Gatti lost his job for slapping someone's butt 30 years ago. The injustice is that Gatti has evidently been harassing female musicians for 30 years and until now the victims knew that if they raised the issue management would get rid of them to protect Gatti. We can hope that we are entering a time when powerful people do not have liberty to sexually harass or assault those that they have power over.
> 
> The story you used as a comparison involved two men who were convicted of rape because were employed selling illegal drugs and the drug dealer they worked for wanted to get rid of him and forced his girlfriend to accuse them of rape. It was wrongful conviction but the conspiracy did not originate with the woman who was the supposed victim. I don't see how it is related to the issue with Gatti.


agree with all your comments.

I am afraid there will always be a minority who attempt to trivialise or invalidate legitimate concerns with deliberately irrelevant anecdotes and examples.


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

I have been reading the Netherlands press reports on this. It seems that the KCO management was already aware of inappropriate behaviour by Gatti with some female members of the orchestra, and had not reacted until the report in the Washington Post became known.

Freely translated from one of the aricles:

>Noteworthy in the orchestral statement of the dismissal is the prominent formulation of the "commotion among stakeholders at home and abroad". That sentence summarizes well what kind of force field an international top orchestra like the Concertgebouw Orchestra stands for: the public opinion of sponsors and relations abroad is also vitally important for reputation and financing. In short, the orchestra can simply not afford to allow a chief conductor to show inappropriate behavior. <

>It seems that the management had no choice today but to act in the way they did. Gatti had lost complete confidence of the orchestra itself, and this was presented to management in no uncertain terms. 
The dismissal now puts the orchestra on the spot for a logistical summer nightmare of sensational proportions: in two weeks the rehearsals for the European orchestral tour begin on 23 August in Amsterdam. Gatti would lead the orchestra in the KCO core repertoire (Bruckner and Mahler). In order to preserve the reputation of one of the best orchestras in the world, the orchestra can not just leave that task to the first best guest conductor.
And that is just the beginning of where the KCO staff will be busy in the coming weeks: in the last quarter of 2018, Gatti would lead 27 concerts for which a couple of steps need to be arranged, followed by another fifteen concerts in the rest of the season. Such as a tour through the United States and a very prestigious seasonal conclusion: a series of performances by Debussy's Pelléas et Mélisande at De Nationale Opera.<


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

stomanek said:


> I am afraid there will always be a minority who attempt to trivialise or invalidate legitimate concerns with deliberately irrelevant anecdotes and examples.


I hope it is a minority.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

El Pais (in Spain) has reported an statement by Daniele Gatti and his PR team about the "recent Concertgebouw" members allegations:

Roughly translated:



Daniele Gatti (July 28-29) said:


> From the bottom of my heart, I'm very sorry. To all women that I have met during my lifetime, and especially to those I didn't show enough respect, I swear that from now on I will be more concious about my behaviour, and my relationships with young and elder women. To be sure that they'll never feel bothered or unconfortable again, particularly in the world of Classical Music


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Hopefully deeds will match words.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Since none of us knows what happned, we are incompetant to pass judgment. But where harrassment is concerned, ties pay the dealer.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> I had women slapping my butt several times (seriously). Now I have a famale collegue at work, who always dresses very provocatively, comes 10cm within my distance and shows me her cleavage and boobs, or her panties with her miniskirt etc. It is a covert sexual behavior, unwanted. Women are teasing men, sometimes just for sport, and some more primitive males cannot control their impulses. There is a power imbalance in relationships just by the very fact, that men are expected to take the lead - to ask to women out, to make the first touch, the make the first kiss etc. And women are not obvious in their signals, but are often vague, hinting, teasing, playing mind games, confusing etc. A lot of women say no and acutally mean yes, because they want to be chased etc (no, this is not a myth, but a personal experience). And women on the whole are not more moral than men. Just in the west (especially the US), there is this anti-male campaign going on.


I think it is helpful with matters like this to ask first "who has the power ?" and, more tellingly, "who doesn't have much power?" as these questions will go a long way towards determining whether what is going on is abusive.

I can't comment on your working environment because I don't even know what industry you work in - presumably there is a dress code? As for the ladies teasing the men - if that reaches the level of being sexual harassment then, yes, the same applies. As for what happened to you - what did it mean to you? Was it abuse? Or play? Could you have refused it without fear of consequences?


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Enthusiast said:


> I can't comment on your working environment because I don't even know what industry you work in - presumably there is a dress code? As for the ladies teasing the men - if that reaches the level of being sexual harassment then, yes, the same applies. As for what happened to you - what did it mean to you? Was it abuse? Or play? Could you have refused it without fear of consequences?


Based on his description, I imagined him working as a pole polisher in a strip club.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Jacck said:


> it is definitely not a normal behavior for me, but I can imagine normal male sexual advances being misrepresented as sexual harrassment, if the woman wants to. And accusing someone of groping in a dressing room that allegedly happened 30 years ago? I cannot remember what happened 10 years ago.


Come on my friend. I remember the good and bad stuff from over 60 years ago. I was sexually assaulted when I was 12 years old and remember every second of it. If I ever see the offender again, I'll take a bat to his kneecaps and then work on the head. Well, I suppose that's not realistic because he's likely 6 feet under by now.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> it is definitely not a normal behavior for me, but I can imagine normal male sexual advances being misrepresented as sexual harrassment, if the woman wants to. And accusing someone of groping in a dressing room that allegedly happened 30 years ago? I cannot remember what happened 10 years ago.


I was on a jury in a trial involving sexual assault of a minor. In the jury room, female jurors described their own experiences of sexual assault and harassment. One was a grandmother who described an assault when she was a teen age girl. She gave her reason for not reporting it, "I knew if i told my father he would kill him." I could see it still affected her.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> Come on my friend. I remember the good and bad stuff from over 60 years ago. I was sexually assaulted when I was 12 years old and remember every second of it. If I ever see the offender again, I'll take a bat to his kneecaps and then work on the head. Well, I suppose that's not realistic because he's likely 6 feet under by now.


as I have written above, it is a question of what constitutes harrassment, ie of degree. Rape and violence are definitely wrong and need to be punished and prosecuted, but is for example this adequate?. 
https://metro.co.uk/2018/05/25/man-65-faces-jail-slapping-waitress-backside-wife-bathroom-7579139/
The waitress could have just confronted the man on the spot in front of his wife. Why police? Why jail? 
or in Canada, asking for a date can bring a harassment claim
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/ba...king-for-a-date-can-bring-a-harrassment-claim
this has just gone too far.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Jack - Concerning the guy slapping the server's butt in the restaurant, I do believe he deserves a few nights in jail. The guy needs to know that he can't put his hands on a woman's private parts without receiving a penalty; a little jail time is a mild response.


----------



## PeterFromLA (Jul 22, 2011)

I suspect that the management discovered enough sordid tales through their preliminary investigation to leave them little recourse but to fire the conductor.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Bulldog said:


> Jack - Concerning the guy slapping the server's butt in the restaurant, I do believe he deserves a few nights in jail. The guy needs to know that he can't put his hands on a woman's private parts without receiving a penalty; a little jail time is a mild response.


men 65 years, he can have mild beginning dementia, ie degeneration of the frontal cortex which inhibits the impulsive sexual behavior of the limbic system. Behavior can then become desinhibited. 
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4980403/
I view the US justice as barbaric and primitive with its absolutely horrendously long jail sentences, capital punishments including mentally ill persons and young adults. A 13-year old boy faces 2 years in prison for slapping a girl on her butt
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...Boy-faces-jail-for-slapping-girls-bottom.html


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> this has just gone too far.


Surely that's for the victims and the courts to decide.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Jacck said:


> men 65 years, he can have mild beginning dementia, ie degeneration of the frontal cortex which inhibits the impulsive sexual behavior of the limbic system. Behavior can then become desinhibited.
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4980403/
> I view the US justice as barbaric and primitive with its absolutely horrendously long jail sentences, capital punishments including mentally ill persons and young adults. A 13-year old boy faces 2 years in prison for slapping a girl on her butt
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...Boy-faces-jail-for-slapping-girls-bottom.html


You're being hard on the women and making excuses for the men. I'll let the court system handle any dementia issues.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> Surely that's for the victims and the courts to decide.


I wish it were, but it seems nowadays mere accusations in the media is enough to execute the sentence.


----------



## Granate (Jun 25, 2016)

Granate said:


> Now how am I going to listen to his recent and refined Mahler 2 and 4? Disgusting! I had hopes on his cycle!


*Amazon France* appears to have an upcoming SACD in October this year with the only information of "Symphony No.1" and "RCO Live" We don't know the composer, we don't know the conductor. What's your bet? Can it be Gatti or they would back down a release of him?

*HOLD ON! The Amazon link reads "G. Mahler"! Now I bet double that it is a scheduled Gatti recording.

To put the cherry on top, next 28 of August he was going to conduct Mahler's No.7.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Jacck said:


> I wish it were, but it seems nowadays mere accusations in the media is enough to execute the sentence.


execute the sentence? Is he in jail already?


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I wish it were, but it seems nowadays mere accusations in the media is enough to execute the sentence.


Somehow you know exactly what it is like in the U.S. from the Czech Republic, reading British press accounts. Maybe you should use empirical data, come here, slap a few asses, grope a few women in dressing rooms, and see if the response is proportionate.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Somehow you know exactly what it is like in the U.S. from the Czech Republic, reading British press accounts. Maybe you should use empirical data, come here, slap a few asses, grope a few women in dressing rooms, and see if the response is proportionate.


I never grope women. When I was young and less experiences, I sometimes tried to invite a girl to a date more than once (which is now a form of sexual harassment too). I was in the US (Boston and Cape Cod) and quite enjoyed it. But even then I considered it much a much less free country then Czech Republic - the prohibition laws, alcohol only in liquor stores and bags, bars closing at 1, police everywhere. I never tried to date there though. I admit that a lot of my information comes from reading, for example a book such a this one
https://www.amazon.com/Men-Strike-B...594037620/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Jacck said:


> men 65 years, he can have mild beginning dementia, ie degeneration of the frontal cortex which inhibits the impulsive sexual behavior of the limbic system. Behavior can then become desinhibited.
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4980403/


What does this have to do with behavior that apparently goes back 30 years?



> I view the US justice as barbaric and primitive with its absolutely horrendously long jail sentences, capital punishments including mentally ill persons and young adults. A 13-year old boy faces 2 years in prison for slapping a girl on her butt
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...Boy-faces-jail-for-slapping-girls-bottom.html


Might be best to avoid bashing other countries legal systems (first Canada, now the U.S.). It's a subject beyond your pay grade. Not to mention that your country's legal system may not be so perfect.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Granate said:


> *Amazon France* appears to have an upcoming SACD in October this year with the only information of "Symphony No.1" and "RCO Live" We don't know the composer, we don't know the conductor. What's your bet? Can it be Gatti or they would back down a release of him?
> 
> *HOLD ON! The Amazon link reads "G. Mahler"! Now I bet double that it is a scheduled Gatti recording.
> 
> To put the cherry on top, next 28 of August he was going to conduct Mahler's No.7.


it makes no difference, Gatti's career is over.
btw, nobody cares about classical music, it is not even trending on Twitter


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Madiel said:


> it makes no difference, Gatti's career is over.


I would say that if Gatti valued his musical work he would not have used his position as an opportunity to harass women that he had professional authority over. Harassing women in a social context in which they are at liberty to ditch you is one thing. Harassing women who you have authority over is a firing offense.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I wish it were, but it seems nowadays mere accusations in the media is enough to execute the sentence.


Your earlier 'it' was not clear, then. I sense some confusion in your response to this story. You seem to begin by complaining about the women making the accusations, then to the generality of women making accusations about men making innocent advances, and then turn your attention to the media. At no point do you acknowledge that Gatti may himself be responsible for his sacking.

I agree that the media have not always covered this kind of story well, and that there may have been instances of false accusations. But the sensible reader will probably accept that only those directly involved in the cases - the accused, the victim(s), the police, the courts - are going to get to the bottom of what has happened, and that it is unwise to draw conclusons based on media reporting.

What I wouldn't conclude is that men can no longer make a pass at a woman; or that men are all sexual predators; or that many women are making it up;...or any number of the other absurd suggestions that press coverage is encouraging us to consider.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> Your earlier 'it' was not clear, then. I sense some confusion in your response to this story. You seem to begin by complaining about the women making the accusations, then to the generality of women making accusations about men making innocent advances, and then turn your attention to the media. At no point do you acknowledge that Gatti may himself be responsible for his sacking. I agree that the media have not always covered this kind of story well, and that there may have been instances of false accusations. But the sensible reader will probably accept that only those directly involved in the cases - the accused, the victim(s), the police, the courts - are going to get to the bottom of what has happened, and that it is unwise to draw conclusons based on media reporting. What I wouldn't conclude is that men can no longer make a pass at a woman; or that men are all sexual predators; or that many women are making it up;...or any number of the other absurd suggestions that press coverage is encouraging us to consider.


I do not know Gatti. Maybe he is a pervert and sexual predator and deserves all of it, or maybe not. I find suspicious that 2 women come 30 years after an incident with a story about groping in a dressing room and he gets fired. Clear assumption of guilt. But as others have said, the management of the institutiion might have other information that is not public. I do not have enough information to decide about his guilt. I am however not sympathetic to women who come with public accusations 30 years later and suspect ulterior motives.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Jacck, you keep harping on the fact that women (and men actually) eventually come out about being assaulted decades after it occurred and are somehow up to no good. You must be young and not quite able to remember that unlike recently hardly anyone reported sexual assaults or harassment. Simply because the framework wasn't in place to deal with it; partially out of misguided shame, wondering if they were perhaps responsible for allowing it. The passage of time doesn't lessen the crime.

You need to think about this before wheeling out more of that disgruntled-man talk about women having men thrown into jail for winking at them. I've made loads of passes at women and still do and I'm not under any investigations. Maybe your technique needs polishing.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

DaveM said:


> Might be best to avoid bashing other countries legal systems (first Canada, now the U.S.). It's a subject beyond your pay grade. Not to mention that your country's legal system may not be so perfect.


US is the biggest, most powerful and dominant country in the world. Czech Republic is a small country with a population of New York City. So it is not that surprising that I know much more about US than you know about Czech Republic. The American culture influences the world through media such as Hollywood movies etc and I read US media almost daily, so I follow the politics and the problems there to some degree. 
https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/09/...iminal-justice-reform-*****-tillis/index.html
I think that the US justice system is brutal. 
https://www.attn.com/stories/14338/how-prison-sentences-america-compare-other-countries

it is also interesting to follow to social trends in the US, because the US is leading the way and what happens there spills to Europe with some delay, first to England and then to the rest of Europe.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Jacck said:


> I do not know Gatti. Maybe he is a pervert and sexual predator and deserves all of it, or maybe not. I find suspicious that 2 women come 30 years after an incident with a story about groping in a dressing room and he gets fired.


A bit more than that. From the story linked in the OP: "Since the publication of the article in the Washington Post, a number of female colleagues of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra reported experiences with Gatti, which are inappropriate considering his position as chief conductor," the orchestra said in a statement.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I do not know Gatti. Maybe he is a pervert and sexual predator and deserves all of it, or maybe not. I find suspicious that 2 women come 30 years after an incident with a story about groping in a dressing room and he gets fired. Clear assumption of guilt. But as others have said, the management of the institutiion might have other information that is not public. I do not have enough information to decide about his guilt. I am however not sympathetic to women who come with public accusations 30 years later and suspect ulterior motives.


The statement of the orchestra in the article linked at the beginning of the post says the a number of women in the orchestra came forward with descriptions in inappropriate behavior after the initial accusation was published. That was given as the main reason for dismissal. An article quoted directly in this thread said that the orchestra management acted after the orchestra members expressed in no uncertain terms that Gatti had lost the respect of the orchestra. Gatti was not convicted of any crime and was not imprisoned. The was no presumption of guilt. He was fired for incompetent and inappropriate management of the orchestra he was put in charge of.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

eugeneonagain said:


> Jacck, you keep harping on the fact that women (and men actually) eventually come out about being assaulted decades after it occurred and are somehow up to no good. You must be young and not quite able to remember that unlike recently hardly anyone reported sexual assaults or harassment. Simply because the framework wasn't in place to deal with it; partially out of misguided shame, wondering if they were perhaps responsible for allowing it. The passage of time doesn't lessen the crime. You need to think about this before wheeling out more of that disgruntled-man talk about women having men thrown into jail for winking at them. I've made loads of passes at women and still do and I'm not under any investigations. Maybe your technique needs polishing.


I am dating a great woman now (a collegue from work, so we have a lot of common), but before that I was in the dating market for several years, and it was just frustrating, that is if you want to find a life partner. I am and never were under any investigation. I am not agressive, never grope women, a respect their boundaries. I am just interested in a fair system for everybody.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

eugeneonagain said:


> The passage of time doesn't lessen the crime.


in the eyes of God maybe, the Law has different requirements (negative prescription) and in any case trial by media is certainly not one of them.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

And yet seemingly less interested in a fair deal for people who only found the courage to speak up about something they had to live with for 30 years?


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Madiel said:


> in the eyes of God maybe, the Law has different requirements (negative prescription) and in any case trial by media is certainly not one of them.


I'm not interested in gods. The law still has to deal with the concept of hidden sex crimes, it's a changing scenario. I doubt the case we are discussing is merely trial by media. No major orchestra would take that risk.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

eugeneonagain said:


> And yet seemingly less interested in a fair deal for people who only found the courage to speak up about something they had to live with for 30 years?


have you ever wondered why the Law contemplates negative prescription?


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

Baron Scarpia said:


> The statement of the orchestra in the article linked at the beginning of the post says the a number of women in the orchestra came forward with descriptions in inappropriate behavior after the initial accusation was published. That was given as the main reason for dismissal. An article quoted directly in this thread said that the orchestra management acted after the orchestra members expressed in no uncertain terms that Gatti had lost the respect of the orchestra. Gatti was not convicted of any crime and was not imprisoned. The was no presumption of guilt. He was fired for incompetent and inappropriate management of the orchestra he was put in charge of.


Exactly. If an orchestra loses all confidence in its conductor, whatever the reasons, it is time to go.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Madiel said:


> have you ever wondered why the Law contemplates negative prescription?


Yes I have, though I admit it's not high on my list of activities. Taxpayer cost most likely.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

eugeneonagain said:


> No major orchestra would take that risk.


trial by media is what we have had until now. when a man's reputation and career are over when there is not even a police file about him, and all we have is newspapers' chit-chat that's trial by media.
James Levine has sued the MET, Gatti intends to sue the RCO, we'll see how it goes.
It is really discomforting seeing so many people who for the sake of justice forget so easily the fundamentals of justice.
In the mean time it was news yesterday in Italy, the case of a film director who had been accused by three women is going to be dismissed in court, two of them for negative prescription (Italy's Law prescribes six months to sue) the third one will be a full acquittal.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Jacck said:


> US is the biggest, most powerful and dominant country in the world. Czech Republic is a small country with a population of New York City. So it is not that surprising that I know much more about US than you know about Czech Republic. The American culture influences the world through media such as Hollywood movies etc and I read US media almost daily, so I follow the politics and the problems there to some degree.
> https://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/09/...iminal-justice-reform-*****-tillis/index.html
> I think that the US justice system is brutal.
> https://www.attn.com/stories/14338/how-prison-sentences-america-compare-other-countries


Cherry picking news articles doesn't make you an expert. You don't have the expertise or the perspective to compare the legal system in a country of 330 million with that of a much smaller country. Your knowledge of the subject is apparently comparable to that of the history of sexual abuse of women by men in high places.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Madiel said:


> trail by media is what we have had until now. when a man's reputation and career are over when there is not even a police file about him, and all we have is newspapers' chit-chat that's trial by media.
> James Levine has sued the MET, Gatti intends to sue the RCO, we'll see how it goes.
> It is really discomforting seeing so many people who for the sake of justice forget so easily the fundamentals of justice.
> In the mean time it was news yesterday in Italy, the case of a film director who had been accused by three women is going to be dismissed in court, two of them for negative prescription (Italy's Law prescribes six months to sue) the third one will be a full acquittal.


He's entitled to sue the orchestra if he thinks he's been mistreated. Maybe he'll get the justice others feel they waited longer for. You did read that he has admitted to abusing his position and mistreated women in a statement he put out? Horse's mouth old boy, not trial by media.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

I tend to hang out with law-abiding citizens; the U.S. justice system treats us very well. So do the police. Unfortunately, we do have problems with the police-minorities interactions.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

DaveM said:


> Cherry picking news articles doesn't make you an expert. You don't have the expertise or the perspective to compare the legal system in a country of 330 million with that of a much smaller country.


In all fairness, there's no reason a person in a small country can't understand the US as well as any of us. We're all staring at the same computer screen and having less and less real-life exposure to our own cultures.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

eugeneonagain said:


> Yes I have, though I admit it's not high on my list of activities. Taxpayer cost most likely.


wrong answer and wrong behavior, democracy requires a basic knowledge about how the system works 
the reason is that even the worse offender deserves a fair trial and the passing of time makes harder if not impossible to gather evidence of the crime, so the law allows the plaintiff a reasonable amount of time (which of course varies according to crimes and countries, not forgetting that every legal system includes some crimes where negative prescription is not contemplated) to sue.


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

....................


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

I knew the real reason, but I chose a flippant answer. There is indeed a problem of evidence gathering, but in this case - as in others - the older cases mirror newer allegations and show patterns of behaviour. People only go to trial where enough evidence is gathered in order to be able to charge someone. 

I am fully engaged in democracy as an active member of a political party. I'm not only a heckler on a classical music forum.:tiphat:


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

....................


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Baron Scarpia said:


> The case of Gatti or Levine (that you brought up) does not involve the justice system. Neither were subjected to any criminal prosecution. They got fired.


why they got fired? again: trial by media.
Don't you think that it is just a little reductive to say they have been fired?
You lose your job and reputation, you will not work again in your life and do you call that firing?
Come on trial by ordeal was fairer than all of this


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Madiel said:


> trial by media is what we have had until now. *when a man's reputation and career are over when there is not even a police file about him, and all we have is newspapers' chit-chat that's trial by media.*
> James Levine has sued the MET, Gatti intends to sue the RCO, we'll see how it goes.
> It is really discomforting seeing so many people who for the sake of justice forget so easily the fundamentals of justice.
> In the mean time it was news yesterday in Italy, the case of a film director who had been accused by three women is going to be dismissed in court, two of them for negative prescription (Italy's Law prescribes six months to sue) the third one will be a full acquittal.


But you are wrong. 1) The media reported his firing. the media report was an EFFECT of his firing, not the CAUSE of his firing. hence you cannot say he had trial by media! 2) His employer elected to end his employment. People have employment termination for far less. In some states in the U.S. the employer can suspend or terminate employment for no reason whatsoever. Are you telling us now that the court system, the judicial system needs to be involved in every potential case of wrong doing where an employer seeks to terminate?


----------



## Guest (Aug 2, 2018)

....................


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I was on a jury in a trial involving sexual assault of a minor. In the jury room, female jurors described their own experiences of sexual assault and harassment. One was a grandmother who described an assault when she was a teen age girl. She gave her reason for not reporting it, "I knew if i told my father he would kill him." I could see it still affected her.


This thread is probably going beyond the matter in hand but I swear, 50% or so of the women in my life have confided to me each several instances of sexual harassment ranging from full scale rape (unreported) to abuse as children. These are the ones who talked - I dont know about the others. From reports in the press and studies I understand that the % of women who have at some time experienced harassment is very high. Which is why it annoys me when I hear people attempting to play it down. Even women try to play it down or victim blaming - "she knew what she was doing - should have said something at the time - why didnt she"

Gatti will no doubt attempt to limit the damage - lesson learned, could have been more sensitive, etc etc. He should in fact, if these allegations are indeed true - be given no future position that gives him the opportunity.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Sonata said:


> But you are wrong. 1) The media reported his firing. the media report was an EFFECT of his firing, not the CAUSE of his firing. hence you cannot say he had trial by media! 2) His employer elected to end his employment. People have employment termination for far less. In some states in the U.S. the employer can suspend or terminate employment for no reason whatsoever. Are you telling us now that the course system, the judicial system needs to be involved in every potential case of wrong doing where an employer seeks to terminate?


Are you sure that you are not posting in the wrong thread?


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Baron Scarpia said:


> Levine was fired because of "trial by media?" Your point is that the Met would not have fired Levine after finding out he had sex with multiple underage boys employed by the Opera company if had not been for a newspaper article? In a sense you may be right./QUOTE]
> 
> I see no chance to equivocate here.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Madiel said:


> why they got fired? again: trial by media.
> Don't you think that it is just a little reductive to say they have been fired?
> You lose your job and reputation, you will not work again in your life and do you call that firing?
> Come on trial by ordeal was fairer than all of this


Bear in mind criminal prosecution is a separate issue from an employer taking action to protect its employees. Employers do not require the same rigorous standard of proof needed in the justice system and if they have good reason to believe in misconduct - that alone will be enough for them to act accordingly.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Madiel said:


> Are you sure that you are not posting in the wrong thread?


Why do you think I am posting in the wrong thread?


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

stomanek said:


> Bear in mind criminal prosecution is a separate issue from an employer taking action to protect its employees. Employers do not require the same rigorous standard of proof needed in the justice system and if they have good reason to believe in misconduct - that alone will be enough for them to act accordingly.


I can tel the difference between an employer taking action and the criminal justice system, but that was not my point, the fact is that the actions taken by these employers are spurred by the media and would never happen if not for the media, while these guys - I repeat it again: these are not ordinary firings, these guys are saying adios to their reputation and career. Which would be fair if it came as a result of a fair process, but that's not what they are getting.
are you so naive to believe that these firings are related to protecting employees?
I have written it in my first post in this thread: these firings are public relations stunts, the RCO will tour the US next year and they knew that after the piece by the Washington post they could not afford to go there while maintaining a professional relationship with Gatti.
btw, you Americans, when you read this stuff and enjoying the fall of Weinstein, Spacey, Levine et cetera are you dreaming Trump?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Madiel said:


> are you so naive to believe that these firings are related to protecting employees?


I also don't think that the firings have much to do with protecting employees. It's more to do with protecting the company reputation and financial bottom line. When an employee is considered a liability, he/she is soon gone. There aren't any righteous motivations involved. But still, the burden rests with the offender. If you do bad, don't expect good results. Maybe now the powerful folks with loose lips and wandering hands will get with the program which is nothing more that treating others with respect.


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

As has been made clear earlier in this thread and in Netherlands press, Gatti was fired because members of the orchestra complained to management about his behaviour, that they had lost all respect for him and that they could no longer work with him. The press did not find out about this until after the firing. Gatti was not tried by the media. There has been no criminal complaint lodged as far as I am aware.

Lets keep to the facts please.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

distantprommer said:


> As has been made clear earlier in this thread and in Netherlands press, Gatti was fired because members of the orchestra complained to management about his behaviour, that they had lost all respect for him and that they could no longer work with him. The press did not find out about this until after the firing. Gatti was not tried by the media. There has been no criminal complaint lodged as far as I am aware.
> 
> Lets keep to the facts please.


the fact is that this complaints have emerged only after the piece published in the Washington Post.
I will say it again: after that piece would it have been possible for the RCO to tour the US without having rescinded its ties with Gatti?
rhetorical question of course
there is obvious speculation to be done about the sudden emergence of this useful statements but I will avoid it


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

KenOC said:


> In all fairness, there's no reason a person in a small country can't understand the US as well as any of us. We're all staring at the same computer screen and having less and less real-life exposure to our own cultures.


I wouldn't say it's impossible, especially when it comes to those who have studied and are educated on the subject, but IMO it's unlikely that someone outside this country is going to be an expert based on the stuff on computer screens. (Full disclosure: unfortunately, far too many who actually live here are uninformed about their own country.)

I came from Canada many years ago and all of my extended family still lives there. I have lived all my working life in the U.S. and my wife and children are citizens (as am I now). My mother and sisters are all university-educated and have access to all the U.S. cable news stations and various magazines and newspapers. Yet, they still make unfair and sometimes ridiculous comparisons between Canada and the U.S. conveniently forgetting the different histories, size and cultural differences. For example, comparing the legal systems would be challenging when you're talking about a country of 28 million (less than the size of California) with 10 provinces vs. a country of 330 million spread over 50 states, each with its own independent legal system.

Assuming one is keeping oneself informed about both past and present history, living in this country is likely to give one a better perspective than someone living in a European country basing their information on articles found in a Google search.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

In the battle between the sexes, the men are losing, and they are discovering, perhaps for the first time, how much power women have. The scales are being balanced, whether fairly or unfairly, for being treated as manipulated cattle, objects, slaves, battered wives, or captives at work of those in power, for want of a better discription. The rancor between the two leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth. It’s terrible. But I also think it’s not exactly right that lives are being routinely destroyed from past mistakes and indiscretions. The men aren’t being granted a chance to make amends, as if they were incapable of learning from their mistakes, though some are apparently not. And the public is being treated as children without an understanding of shades of gray in human behavior, and it may not always be the males who are at fault, because women are sometimes attracted to men of power and may compromise their own values for the sake of personal gain (promotions, recognition and opportunities) because they know what most men want: pleasure, and being told how wonderful they are.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Baron Scarpia said:


> I read the story about Gatti. After publication of the article current female members of the Concertgebouw Orchestra felt empowered to report continued harassment. He wasn't fired because he slapped a woman's butt 30 years ago, he was fired because members of his orchestra reported ongoing sexual harassment. He was using his authority over the orchestra to sexually harass women. Termination of his employment is an entirely appropriate response, probably the only appropriate response.


I agree. In these kinds of cases the behavior is usually an open secret for years before any action is taken and after it's over everyone just wonders why it took so long to cut him loose.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Just for the record: 'innocent until proven guilty' in which country it applies is a legal/Constitutional right. It doesn't apply to business/employee relationships. As an employee, you can be fired for _almost_ anything.


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Baron Scarpia said:


> For reference, here is the article that revealed Gatti harassment.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/ente...5eac230e514_story.html?utm_term=.ea0f031744ad


Listen, setting Gatti aside for a moment, how completely naïve of Bowers to go to Preucil's room after sharing a number of drinks with him when inhibitions can be routinely lowered. It's a prescription for disaster. He might have thought she was personally interested in him. I do not believe, at least in this case, that she doesn't share some of the responsibility for what happened between them. Twenty-six years old as an adult and how naïve. She also routinely shared drinks with him informally over a number of weeks prior. Why should either of them be excused for their poor judgment? And yet such considerations are never mentioned. I'd send them both to the pokey for awhile to reconsider their actions because of the huge consequences such actions can have in today's society. But legally, the law never sees shades of grey and it's one party who is apparently considered all right and the other party apparently all wrong. What's wrong with this picture? Everything. And that panders to a docile public who are treated like children because they are consumers who must be protected from themselves so they can continue to consume and think that everybody in the public eye are leading pure lives that even those in the public sector aren't living. I see this as fundamentally a societal problem, a cultural problem, rather than a legal one, except of course in matters of rape, that calls for a deepening of understanding between men and women, what makes for attraction, and how to best handle it when things go wrong. In the meantime, the wisdom related to that seems to have evaporated into thin air.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

DaveM said:


> Assuming one is keeping oneself informed about both past and present history, living in this country is likely to give one a better perspective than someone living in a European country basing their information on articles found in a Google search.


I can't say I agree with that. The only reason a person in another country might know less about the US than a resident is lack of interest. The same information is available to all.

Consider: If I want to know about the US legal system, do I go to the courts? No, I go on-line. If I want to know the demographics of our prison population, do I go to our prisons? No, again I go to the computer. If I want to learn to make the most popular American foods, do I interview chefs in the better restaurants of that type? Well, you get the idea. Anybody anywhere in the world has access to the same information, pictures, maps, opinions, and so forth that I do.

Today, the Internet is our reality, and that reality is the same for everyone. Almost the entire world is served by the same schema of knowledge, which is something quite new in history.

Added note: A recent study showed that most Americans spend the majority of their waking hours staring at a computer screen or a smartphone.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Larkenfield said:


> Listen, setting Gatti aside for a moment, how completely naïve of Bowers to go to Preucil's room after sharing a number of drinks with him when inhitions can be routinely lowered. It's a prescription for disaster. He might have thought she was personally interested in him. I do not believe, at least in this case, that she doesn't share some the responsibility in what happened between them. Twenty-six years old as an adult and how naïve. She also routinely shared drinks with him informally over a number of weeks prior. Why should either of them be excused for their carelessly poor judgment?


Yes, going out drinking with a man and then going to his room never imagining that anything will happen is incredibly naive and/or irresponsible. If we don't teach girls (and boys) to deal with the dark side of human sexual behavior on grounds that "you're not to blame" and "they shouldn't do such things," we as a society are naive and irresponsible. We don't leave our doors unlocked and our money lying out on the table just because people "shouldn't" be out there prowling and robbing us. Of course they shouldn't be - but they are, and our unlocked doors only encourage them.

I wonder whether Ms. Bowers, growing up, was ever told that there are men who will take advantage of vulnerable women and that she needed to know how to protect herself? Or was she told that if anything unpleasant should ever happen to her, she would be perfectly justified in denying any responsibility for her own misfortune? Or was she ever told anything at all?

Sexual predators need to be held accountable - fired, imprisoned, impeached, whatever, according to the seriousness of the case - but I would hope that the continuing abundance of bad behavior coming to light inspires more than moralistic grandstanding and litigiousness, and serves to remind us of our flawed human nature and of how we must deal with it day to day.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Woodduck said:


> Yes, going out drinking with a man and then going to his room never imagining that anything will happen is incredibly naive and/or irresponsible.


Especially if that man is Mike Tyson! He went to jail for that, which I always thought was a bit strange. There's a concept in law called "assuming the risk," which seems seldom invoked these days for some reason.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

This is almost too ridiculous to be true ... a bunch of guys who, for the most part, are not lawyers, journalists, psychologists or young musicians in search of a career, all discussing the law, media, the emotional impact of sexual harassment and the pressures of worrying about careers. What is clear is that there is no first hand understanding of what sexual harassment is like on the receiving end and why it is so difficult to speak out, especially when it comes from those with authority and power. Also, from the evidence of all these pages of posts, there is little second hand knowledge. Might I suggest that instead of continuing to display your ill-informed opinions, you talk to those who are dealing with it and try to get a real understanding of the issues. It isn't difficult, just talk to any group of female musicians and you will get an earful.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, journalist, psychologist or musician, however I do have other relevant experiences and I have talked to professional musicians about their experiences and reactions.


----------



## Weird Heather (Aug 24, 2016)

I have observed as this thread has blown up today. I was a bit apprehensive about posting here, but I think I should take the risk and post my thoughts.

This is difficult for me. Danlele Gatti's recording with the Royal Philharmonic is one of my favorite performances of Mahler's 4th Symphony. Also, it is impossible to imagine opera without James Levine's influence. I have many video and audio recordings of Levine conducting the Metropolitan Opera, and I would not ever want to be without those performances. These men are wonderful artists, but it appears that they have engaged in actions that cannot be condoned by any decent person.

I have seen the recent articles in the Washington Post. I am a subscriber to that newspaper, and it is one of the top two or three sources of news for me. It is a credible newspaper, with a long history of exposing troublesome and difficult events. When this newspaper reports something that I find uncomfortable or unbelievable, I can't simply discount it.

In my life and my career, I have been relatively fortunate. I have never been harassed (or worse) on the job, and the worst I have ever experienced was some groping at bars and parties. Even those relatively minor incidents are imprinted on my mind, and I can remember them as if they had happened yesterday. A creep grabbed my boobs in a bar about fifteen years ago, and I still remember it as vividly as if it had happened yesterday. I can't even begin to imagine the lingering memories that must stick with the women who have really been abused. I know women who have been raped, and I know women who have been forced out of their jobs or careers because they have refused the advances of creepy men. What would I do in this situation? I don't know. I've been unemployed and on the verge of homelessness before. To avoid that, what would I be willing to tolerate in the future? To the men out there who think this isn't a serious problem, would you be willing to tolerate some creepy person tugging on your wiener if it meant the preservation of your livelihood?

The music industry must be especially difficult. The stereotypical dictatorial conductor has a lot of power. There are far more talented musicians than there are positions in the industry. Those few who are fortunate enough to get positions as soloists, musicians in top orchestras, or opera singers must be willing to do just about anything to preserve their positions. How does a woman respond when someone who can make or break her career makes a sexual advance?

Perhaps some heads need to roll at this point. If anything, it will send a message to the next generation of conductors, professors, concertmasters, and other prominent musicians that activities that were tolerated in the past are no longer acceptable. Nobody who is pursuing a career in music (or anything else, for that matter) should be forced to put up with sexual harassment in order to advance. Perhaps the sacrifice of a few great, but morally flawed, artists now will result in a better future for everybody in the industry.


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2018)

Becca said:


> This is almost too ridiculous to be true ... a bunch of guys


Well, yes, a bunch of "guys", but let's not rush to condemn them for being the only gender around at the time Art Rock posted the story. ("Hold off you guys until the ladies have had their say").

"Guys" are as entitled as gals to an opinion on the story and its related issues.

And unless the "guys" are going to 'fess up, you have no idea of the extent of their experience of sexual relations and the abuse of them. You don't have to be a woman to have suffered unwanted sexual advances. IMO (only a second class opinion of course, being a guy) unless _men _change their opinions and their behaviours, abuse and the abuse of power will continue.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Becca said:


> This is almost too ridiculous to be true ... a bunch of guys who, for the most part, are not lawyers, journalists, psychologists or young musicians in search of a career, all discussing the law, media, the emotional impact of sexual harassment and the pressures of worrying about careers. What is clear is that there is no first hand understanding of what sexual harassment is like on the receiving end and why it is so difficult to speak out, especially when it comes from those with authority and power. Also, from the evidence of all these pages of posts, there is little second hand knowledge. Might I suggest that instead of continuing to display your ill-informed opinions, you talk to those who are dealing with it and try to get a real understanding of the issues. It isn't difficult, just talk to any group of female musicians and you will get an earful. In the interests of full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, journalist, psychologist or musician, however I do have other relevant experiences and I have talked to professional musicians about their experiences and reactions.


sexual harrassment is a vague term. There are really serious offences that need to be dealt with harshly. Rape, violence, abuse of children, all of these can have lasting consequences for mental health. But then there is a whole spectrum of much less serious offences - sexual jokes, winking, comments on attractiveness, and lower-back touching. How to deal with those behaviors? 
Of course every form of power abuse is wrong, but do you think that only women are victims of it? You judge men but you know little about their reality. Why are most suicid victims male?


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2018)

Jacck said:


> But then there is a whole spectrum of much less serious offences - sexual jokes, winking, comments on attractiveness, and lower-back touching. How to deal with those behaviors?


How to deal with "lower-back touching"? Hanging at the least, I should say!


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Enthusiast said:


> I suppose he should have been suspended pending investigation rather than fired. That he wasn't suggests to me that there is more to the story than is in the public domain. Perhaps he has admitted it or something like that. I imagine he would be in a position to sue if he is wrongly treated by his employer so I doubt his case was dealt with in any slapdash way.
> 
> I think it is worth my saying - as no-one else is - that the behaviour he is accused of is not easily forgiven or forgotten. It isn't merely sexual assault - that would be bad enough - because he is accused of acting from a position of power towards people who were under his power.


But now in the wake of #metoo it is kill and ask questions later. Due process goes out the window. On an unrelated note, I wonder if James Levine is busy these days?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Becca said:


> This is almost too ridiculous to be true ... a bunch of guys who, for the most part, are not lawyers, journalists, psychologists or young musicians in search of a career, all discussing the law, media, the emotional impact of sexual harassment and the pressures of worrying about careers. What is clear is that there is no first hand understanding of what sexual harassment is like on the receiving end and why it is so difficult to speak out, especially when it comes from those with authority and power. Also, from the evidence of all these pages of posts, there is little second hand knowledge. Might I suggest that instead of continuing to display your ill-informed opinions, you talk to those who are dealing with it and try to get a real understanding of the issues. It isn't difficult, just talk to any group of female musicians and you will get an earful.
> 
> In the interests of full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, journalist, psychologist or musician, however I do have other relevant experiences and I have talked to professional musicians about their experiences and reactions.


I'm not sure if you read the thread before posting but there are many things in it that are not as you describe. There is actually quite a wide range of opinions and experience, for example. And the subject matter has incorporated abuse of boys (the Levine case) as well as of women. But, yes, the posters here are mostly or all men. Would you have men who have some awareness of the issue - some posters here have talked with abused, harassed and molested people or having been molested themselves (and willing to mention it here) - keep quiet and wait for a woman to comment? I'm not sure what you want - but am interested in your telling us.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Women demand to be believed and feminists passive-aggressively demand that sexual harassment become the only issue worthy of public interest almost. There is a culture of silencing which is replacing the old culture of silence (both are bad). I am not a lawyer but the presumption of innocence is a basic pillar of law, even when the accuser is a woman. Geoffrey Rush's reputation was trashed recently based on allegations of no credible nature. The culture of witchhunt seems to be perfectly acceptable when targeted at white men. That is no way to run a society. Let Gatti have his day in court. If the meeja can report and discuss this case, then others can comment on the general culture of metooism


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Eusebius12 said:


> Women demand to be believed and feminists passive-aggressively demand that sexual harassment become the only issue worthy of public interest almost. There is a culture of silencing which is replacing the old culture of silence (both are bad). I am not a lawyer but the presumption of innocence is a basic pillar of law, even when the accuser is a woman. Geoffrey Rush's reputation was trashed recently based on allegations of no credible nature. The culture of witchhunt seems to be perfectly acceptable when targeted at white men. That is no way to run a society. Let Gatti have his day in court. If the meeja can report and discuss this case, then others can comment on the general culture of metooism


how the US society stereotypizes white men can be seen in the Simpsons animated sitcom. That sitcom captures the essense of the American culture incredibly well and is a work of genius. Homer Simpson, white male, head of the family, is portrayed as incompetent and stupid. Bart Simson as a rascal. And Marge and Lisa are the clever and competent women that run the household. And this is a pretty common stereotyping in most american movies. White men are increasingly driven into a corner by this femist aggression that is absolutely not about gender equality
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/...04/shaming-men-doesnt-build-healthy-sexuality
https://www.psychologytoday.com/int...ce-sex-women-rule-men-drool-the-markets-cruel


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

In France on holiday at the moment. This has been one of the big news stories this week:

I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:

France shocked by video of woman being slapped by harasser - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45005069


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2018)

@Jacck.

I can't agree with your "victimhood" analysis - at least, not with the examples you cite or the extent of the problem you seem to suggest.

Nor do I think that opinion here can be reduced to "people need to deal with these things themselves", not least because there is an array of "things" being cited.

What makes this hard to get to grips with is the disagreement over what, exactly, is being cited as "the problem." That's partly because no two countries have exactly the same cultural standards; partly because of differences between national and international media standards; differences between countries' experience of gender politics (current and historical); and differences between those who seek to focus on specific examples an those who seek always to generalise from the specific, often distorting the debate along the way (such as the idea that the waitress seeking redress is an example not of a society dominated by the male attitude to women, but of "victimhood".

And that's before you get into differences of perception between genders - and we already know that there is no single female or male perspective.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> @Jacck.
> I can't agree with your "victimhood" analysis - at least, not with the examples you cite or the extent of the problem you seem to suggest. Nor do I think that opinion here can be reduced to "people need to deal with these things themselves", not least because there is an array of "things" being cited. What makes this hard to get to grips with is the disagreement over what, exactly, is being cited as "the problem." That's partly because no two countries have exactly the same cultural standards; partly because of differences between national and international media standards; differences between countries' experience of gender politics (current and historical); and differences between those who seek to focus on specific examples an those who seek always to generalise from the specific, often distorting the debate along the way (such as the idea that the waitress seeking redress is an example not of a society dominated by the male attitude to women, but of "victimhood". And that's before you get into differences of perception between genders - and we already know that there is no single female or male perspective.


we are all just people and there are good and bad people irrespective of gender. And a war among genders does not profit anyone. Man and woman should work as a team, each has different strenghts and weaknesses. In the West in general there is the problem of too much litigation, lawsuits, lawyers everywhere, political hypercorrectness and victimhood. I defnitely feel it has gone too far. When I was in the US, I worked in food industry and sometimes worked as a cashier and so met a lot of different people. I met so many entitled black people that had the attitude "I can be as rude as I want, and if you respond to it, you are a racist". I don't own them anything, my nation never had slaves and we never colonized anyone and so I have no feeling of historical guilt towards them. I would just telll them to go ..... but the managers were always so apologetic.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Becca said:


> This is almost too ridiculous to be true ... a bunch of guys who, for the most part, are not lawyers, journalists, psychologists or young musicians in search of a career, all discussing the law, media, the emotional impact of sexual harassment and the pressures of worrying about careers. What is clear is that there is no first hand understanding of what sexual harassment is like on the receiving end and why it is so difficult to speak out, especially when it comes from those with authority and power. Also, from the evidence of all these pages of posts, there is little second hand knowledge. Might I suggest that instead of continuing to display your ill-informed opinions, you talk to those who are dealing with it and try to get a real understanding of the issues. It isn't difficult, just talk to any group of female musicians and you will get an earful.
> 
> In the interests of full disclosure, I am not a lawyer, journalist, psychologist or musician, however I do have other relevant experiences and I have talked to professional musicians about their experiences and reactions.


Hear, hear .


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Jacck said:


> we are all just people and there are good and bad people irrespective of gender. And a war among genders does not profit anyone. Man and woman should work as a team, each has different strenghts and weaknesses. In the West in general there is the problem of too *much litigation, lawsuits, lawyers everywhere, political hypercorrectness and victimhood.* I defnitely feel it has gone too far. When I was in the US, I worked in food industry and sometimes worked as a cashier and so met a lot of different people. I met so many entitled black people that had the attitude "I can be as rude as I want, and if you respond to it, you are a racist". I don't own them anything, my nation never had slaves and we never colonized anyone and so I have no feeling of historical guilt towards them. I would just telll them to go ..... but the managers were always so apologetic.


Sure there is. But again, the topic at hand with Gotti......that's not what's going on. If an employee is stirring up this much trouble, IF the allegations have merit, then releasing him is appropriate. They are not being litigious.

Yes victimhood has gone too far. But so has abuse of power and it's strange that you are not up in arms over that. These people are not calling for the hangman's noose, they are calling for a safe atmosphere to work!


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Another thing: You say "people are going overboard acting the victim". And "why didn't these women come forward sooner?" 
Well, hell! if they came forward sooner you would have complained that they were acting the victim! FFS. You are so upset that someone loses their job over their alleged behavior, but many of these people in positions of power threaten to destroy the career of the "recipient" (since you don't like victims) of their indecent behavior if they DO come forward sooner!

And yes, there is a difference between sexual jokes, unwanted touching and full on rape. there are degrees. But did anyone, ANYONE accuse him of simply telling a few dirty jokes?


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2018)

Jacck said:


> we are all just people and there are good and bad people irrespective of gender. And a war among genders does not profit anyone. Man and woman should work as a team, each has different strenghts and weaknesses. In the West in general there is the problem of too much litigation, lawsuits, lawyers everywhere, political hypercorrectness and victimhood. I defnitely feel it has gone too far. When I was in the US, I worked in food industry and sometimes worked as a cashier and so met a lot of different people. I met so many entitled black people that had the attitude "I can be as rude as I want, and if you respond to it, you are a racist". I don't own them anything, my nation never had slaves and we never colonized anyone and so I have no feeling of historical guilt towards them. I would just telll them to go ..... but the managers were always so apologetic.


Now we're on to racism? Stand still will you? A moving target is just too irritating!


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I think this discussion has run its course, and I won't prolong it except to say: I cannot know what it is like to be a woman, anymore than I can know what it's like to be African-American, Native American, gay, etc. Therefore, I have to take my knowledge (or perception thereof) from thosewho are. I have no choice in the matter. And I won't deride 'political correctness' as a way of casting aspersion on the idea that people ought to be nice to each other.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Robert Pickett said:


> In France on holiday at the moment. This has been one of the big news stories this week:
> I saw this on the BBC and thought you should see it:
> France shocked by video of woman being slapped by harasser - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45005069


this is unfortunate and the guy should be hunted down by the police. But is this specific to women? I am a male and I do not know how many times I crossed to the other side of the street if I saw approaching a band of drunk guys that scream at you and are looking just for a reason to start a fight. It is common sense to ignore such people and avoid any comments that could provoke them. This does not mean that I am advocating the behavior of such people, on the contrary. But this situation can occur to any gender.


----------



## Taggart (Feb 14, 2013)

Thread temporarily closed for housekeeping.

Some posts have been removed for consideration by the moderators.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Thread re-opened.

We would remind members that there should be no discussion of religion and politics on the main forum.

Within the Politics and Religion in Classical Music area religion and politics can be discussed only in relation to Classical Music.

If you wish to discuss religion and politics in general please confine your posts to the Social Groups.

Some purely political posts have been removed.


----------



## lluissineu (Dec 27, 2016)

I Was in Amsterdam in may. I went to a rehearsal with Trifonov, RCO and Gatti and then, next day to The concert (Prokofiev's third piano concerto and Mahler's Titan Symphony). I noticed Gatti Was Winking an eye to the second violin but I didn't realize it was harrassment.

Talking seriously, I prefer staying on the fence in the matter. I can only say that The Concertgebouw is superb (both, concert hall and orchestra) and Gatti for me is not as good as Haitink, Chailly or Jansons, but he has lately be come a better conductor).

I'll just and that when I visited The Gewandhaus I was told Chailly was a superb conductor but an ******* as a human beeing. I just want to enjoy listening to music and better if it is live music.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

Taggart said:


> Thread temporarily closed for housekeeping.
> 
> Some posts have been removed for consideration by the moderators.
> 
> ...


In almost nine years of TC membership, this was the first thread of mine that was closed down, even if just temporarily. A special moment. I thank all of you who contributed to the discussion in unapproved way to have made this possible.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

lluissineu said:


> I Was in Amsterdam in may. I went to a rehearsal with Trifonov, RCO and Gatti and then, next day to The concert (Prokofiev's third piano concerto and Mahler's Titan Symphony). I noticed Gatti Was Winking an eye to the second violin but I didn't realize it was harrassment.
> 
> Talking seriously, I prefer staying on the fence in the matter. I can only say that The Concertgebouw is superb (both, concert hall and orchestra) and Gatti for me is not as good as Haitink, Chailly or Jansons, but he has lately be come a better conductor).
> 
> I'll just and that when I visited The Gewandhaus I was told Chailly was a superb conductor but an ******* as a human beeing. I just want to enjoy listening to music and better if it is live music.


I doubt the winking was the problem..... I think they had more of a problem with the alleged groping. I think staying out of it and focusing listening to. the music is fine if one wants to stay out of the issue. But the fact of the matter is, real.people,musicians, are dealing with these **** human beings as you say and they have a right to a professional and safe work environment


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

one of the hottest thread here reopened, but one needs to tread with care in this minefield. 
I will explain once again why I am against the whole #MeToo and consider it sexist and unjust. 
1) women are not morally better than men. They are not as much prone to physical violence, but they are prone to verbal abuse, mental abuse, lying, cheating, manipulation
2) the whole #MeToo movement violates the main premise of the justice system "innocent until proven guilty" and makes it into "guilty until proven innocent"
3) these blank accusations give women tremendous power without any responsibility to destroy men's lifes. 
4) some of these #MeToo accusations are ridiculous. Women accuse powerful/famous/wealthy men such as Morgan Freeman, that 20 years ago he had sexist remarks or lifted her skirt etc. and want to be compsensated for this enormous trauma that they allegedly suffered by such behavior. The real motive is greed, attention seeking. 
5) think of Monika Lewinsky who hid her stained blue dress with Bill's semen for several years without washing it. This shows that this whole affair was calculated and premeditated by her (she is probably a histrionic psychopath)

If a women makes false accusation (rape, domestic violence etc), she should be prosecuted and jailed for the same amount of time as the original offence, ie if she falsely accuses someone of rape, she should get 20 years in prison. That is a JUST system. And we are very far from that.

If you want to go down the rabbit hole of these gender issues, read the discussion under this article. It is pretty fascinating
https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/p...y/news-story/7aa04498e3c2673ecd4f474573258b10


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

I agree women are not morally superior to men

I agree false accusations of proven warrant the same severity of penalty

remember men get sexually assaulted too. You are ignoring the fact that this can go beyond a battle of the genders issue but a human rights issue.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Art Rock said:


> In almost nine years of TC membership, this was the first thread of mine that was closed down, even if just temporarily. A special moment. I thank all of you who contributed to the discussion in unapproved way to have made this possible.


This eventually happens to all great journalists. I was proud to have taken part...in a small way. Next is the Pulitzer.


----------



## Guest (Aug 4, 2018)

Jacck said:


> one of the hottest thread here reopened, but one needs to tread with care in this minefield.


You have read the articles providing the background to the OP I suppose? For example:



> Landing a spot in a young-artist program at a major opera house is a ticket to a big career for emerging singers. Soprano Alicia Berneche was 24 on her first day at the Lyric Opera of Chicago's Ryan Opera Center in 1996, and she was beaming as she sat in the auditorium when Daniele Gatti, the internationally renowned conductor, then 34, stepped off the podium to speak to her. Berneche says that he offered her a coaching session - just the kind of opportunity the opera program recommended young artists take - and that she followed him to his dressing room to set up a time. But once inside, she claims, she found "his hands on my rear end, and his tongue down my throat." One of Berneche's friends confirmed to The Post that the singer had talked about the experience at the time.





> Berneche isn't the only one to make allegations about Gatti, who is now chief conductor of the great Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra in Amsterdam (and will tour the United States with it in the spring of 2019). The soprano Jeanne-Michèle Charbonnet told The Post that Gatti tried something similar with her when she was singing in Wagner's "The Flying Dutchman" in Bologna, Italy, four years later. "I pushed him off and ran out of the room," Charbonnet says. The company never hired her again. A friend of Charbonnet's told The Post that she had told her about the incident, many years later.
> Berneche says she wanted to report Gatti's behavior but a well-meaning adviser to whom she had turned said, "If you come forward, you will be fired, and he will continue."


In fairness to Gatti, his response:



> In a statement delivered through a spokesman, Gatti said he was surprised by the charges. "All my life I have always been totally alien to any behavior that may be referred to [by] the term harassment, whether psychological or sexual," he said. "Every time I have approached someone, I have always done it fully convinced that the interest was mutual. The facts referred to took place a long time ago, but if I have offended anyone, I sincerely apologize."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/ente...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.19c6738608c2


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I will repeat: innocent until proven guilty is a legal/Constitutional issue such that a defendant does not have to prove innocence in court. A business can fire someone for almost anything.


----------



## lluissineu (Dec 27, 2016)

When I said I prefered sitting on The fence I didn't mean that The problems of sexual harrassment didn't bother me. It is a big problem and sometímes Hard to Imagine there days. I just Meant 
I didn't want to take sides because I really don't know for sure What it happened and as a music lover I just want to emphasize The quality of musicians.


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> The chief conductor at Amsterdam's renowned Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra, Daniele Gatti, has been fired because of allegations of sexual harassment. Story here.


I haven't yet read through the thread, so I wouldn't be surprised if my viewpoint has only been repeated dozens of times in every reply already.

It's quite a weird feeling to be a fan of someone famous, someone creative, someone really talented to discover that they have sexually assaulted or harassed people, committed other kinds of crimes or have said morally questionable things. I still love Bill Cosby's work on The Cosby Show, I still love Louis CK's stand-up work and, although Levine, Gatti and Dutoit aren't my favourite conductors, I still really admire their work as conductors in the orchestral/opera world. For me, it can be hard to reconcile that someone who conducted one of the most memorable Mahler concerts I have seen has repeatedly assaulted women because I honestly wish for sexual assault to not be a problem in any industry. Waking up to a harsh and scary reality that contradicts that ideal isn't going to be comfortable for anyone/ Not everything is black and white. I would rather not jump to Gatti's defence as it would only be naive to ignore it as a smaller case in a much wider issue of sexism, assault, harassment, violence and power and how it manages to thrive at the detriment of others.

I am sure we know the phrase _a few bad apples spoil the bunch_ and I guess it's pertinent to that wider issue. The obvious questions that I am sure would spring to everyone's mind: How can we eradicate the bad apples from the bunch? More importantly: how can we prevent the apples from going bad in the first place? It's thankfully rare to come across people who think it is okay to catcall, send unsolicited dick pics or slaps on the bum, but as long as people behave in such ways then I'm sure it won't be out of the question that such behaviour will escalate in an environment that gives someone the power to do so. It's the first sign of a rotting apple whose rot will only spread in the industry in which they work.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Sonata said:


> I agree women are not morally superior to men
> I agree false accusations of proven warrant the same severity of penalty
> remember men get sexually assaulted too. You are ignoring the fact that this can go beyond a battle of the genders issue but a human rights issue.


Exactly, I am all for HUMAN rights issue, ie there are oppressed women and men, abused women and men, suffering women and men. But modern feminism (and I perceive the MeeToo campaign as its offshoot) is all about empowering women at the expense of men. This sexual harrassment issue is mostly American cultural thing. I do not deny that it exists, but I think the women there perceive as "harrassment" mere harmless comments, touches, advances, that is what other cultures see as normal flirting between the genders. I have been touched by women countless times - slapped on the butt, or they come to from behind and touch my back/neck with their breasts etc., without doing any fuss about it. When you criminalize such behavior, you create a really toxic atmosphere on the workplace and between the genders. This is the consequence
https://globalnews.ca/news/4068700/me-too-backlash-pence-rule-mentoring-canada/
"_Thirty per cent of male managers surveyed said they are uncomfortable working alone with female colleagues, over twice the percentage who said so in the past. Meanwhile, the number of male managers who have concerns about mentoring women more than tripled, from 5 per cent to 16 per cent_"

and this is the mob justice in practice: "High-profile death prompts backlash against #MeToo in Sweden"
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/wor...ts-backlash-against-metoo-in-sweden-1.3444849


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

> Daniele Gatti, the internationally renowned conductor, then 34, stepped off the podium to speak to her. Berneche says that he offered her a coaching session - just the kind of opportunity the opera program recommended young artists take - and that she followed him to his dressing room to set up a time. But once inside, she claims, she found "his hands on my rear end, and his tongue down my throat."


and what is the big deal? It is not like he raped her, beat her and left her bleeding in dust. Maybe he was a little narcissist (these guys sometimes are) and was uncritically overvalueing his own attractiveness. Maybe the girl flirted with him and he misinterpreted her signals. Maybe she misread his signals. She could have guessed that when a conductor chooses to invite young and hitherto unknown woman to his private quarters, there might be more to it. I do not know where the truth is. But what is described here seems like inappropriate advances rather than some serious rape. She probably told him no and left his quarters immediately and that was it. I have no idea why she needs to report such an incident to the media 20 years later. Because I doubt it left her traumatized, although I admit it might not have been pleasant for her at that time. And I have seem some really traumatized people with PTSD after actual rape or war indicents.

PS: but if more women reported incidents such as these, I admit, that firing him was justified and probably the right thing to do.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

we have a legend in Czech Republic about a war of the genders - the Wild Šárka (Divoká Šárka) was the first feminist more than a thousand years ago
https://www.radio.cz/en/section/czechs/czechs-in-history-2001-03-21
it has been made into an opera by both Fibich and Janáček. Despite my love for Janáček, I like Fibich's Šárka better


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

If anyone is in any doubt about why women (yes, and men) have such difficulty in speaking up about sexual and power harassment, just look over some of the recent posts which so clearly shows the type of questioning and even negativity which they can expect to receive, and which many of them are not willing to face no matter how bad the experiences. Also, when one or more do go public you will almost certainly see others become willing to also speak up ... there is safety and support and even belief in numbers.

A couple of additional comments...
- As has been mentioned more than once, we are not dealing with a legal forum in which proven guilt is required, employment contracts very often include clauses allowing for dismissal in cases of improper behaviour and/or bringing the organization into disrepute. Proven guilt is not required, if the offending party feels it was wrong, THEN it goes to to legal proceedings.
- Quite a lot of what we have been hearing about in the classical world (and elsewhere) dates back to when there was no realistic way of doing anything about the perpetrators without seriously risking one's reputation and career. Just saying "no" often wasn't an option, especially for those starting out, even if it meant making less that wise choices, the "casting couch" was a part of the real world, like it or not. Now that we have (hopefully) moved on, it is possible to bring things into the light just as has happened with so many undesirable aspects of the past.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Becca said:


> If anyone is in any doubt about why women (yes, and men) have such difficulty in speaking up about sexual and power harassment, just look over some of the recent posts which so clearly shows the type of questioning and even negativity which they can expect to receive, and which many of them are not willing to face no matter how bad the experiences. Also, when one or more do go public you will almost certainly see others become willing to also speak up ... there is safety and support and even belief in numbers.
> 
> A couple of additional comments...
> - As has been mentioned more than once, we are not dealing with a legal forum in which proven guilt is required, employment contracts very often include clauses allowing for dismissal in cases of improper behaviour and/or bringing the organization into disrepute. Proven guilt is not required, if the offending party feels it was wrong, THEN it goes to to legal proceedings.
> - Quite a lot of what we have been hearing about in the classical world (and elsewhere) dates back to when there was no realistic way of doing anything about the perpetrators without seriously risking one's reputation and career. Just saying "no" often wasn't an option, especially for those starting out, even if it meant making less that wise choices, the "casting couch" was a part of the real world, like it or not. Now that we have (hopefully) moved on, it is possible to bring things into the light just as has happened with so many undesirable aspects of the past.


I also find many of the recent posts highly offensive. But quite a few here were responding to such posts until you asked us to stop.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Becca said:


> - Quite a lot of what we have been hearing about in the classical world (and elsewhere) dates back to when there was no realistic way of doing anything about the perpetrators without seriously risking one's reputation and career. Just saying "no" often wasn't an option, especially for those starting out, even if it meant making less that wise choices, the "casting couch" was a part of the real world, like it or not. Now that we have (hopefully) moved on, it is possible to bring things into the light just as has happened with so many undesirable aspects of the past.


power abuse is a common thing experienced by both genders, so do not make it a female thing. I experienced it while doing my Ph.D. As a Ph.D. you are basically a slave to your mentor who has complete power over your future and career. You are expected to basically sleep in the lab for ridiculous compensation and obeying every whim of your mentor. And my mentor was as actual high-functioning psychopath (not in an exagerrated sense of the word, but an actual manipulative abusive predatorial psyhopath)
http://bulliedacademics.blogspot.com/2012/01/abuse-of-phd-students.html
there is nowhere to go to complain. If you complain, you start and conflict with your supervisor and you run a high risk of losing several years of your life etc. 
actually, a woman can use her feminine charms to speed up her career progress and some women do that. This option is off limits to guys.


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

Jacck said:


> and what is the big deal?


So it's for _you _(or us) to decide whether what has been reported is "a big deal" - not the victim, not the employers? Because it's not "some serious rape" it doesn't merit reporting?

I can't think of quite the right word to describe my reaction to your attitude; perhaps revolting will have to do for now.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

It’s possible that in some circumstances there has been an overreaction in this MeToo environment. But that is what happens when the pendulum swings away from a situation where, over a long period of time, countless women (and likely some men apparently) in the classical music industry were forced to accept unconscionable behavior from those in power in order to get or keep a job. This means that with the overreaction a few may be unfairly accused, but that will be a pittance compared to those abused, with no recourse, over a century or centuries for that matter.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Madiel said:


> The fact remains: everyone is innocent until justice has proven that he is guilty.
> Gatti is only the latest victim of a media bubble which is destroying careers of people that no justice system has proven guilty yet.
> Newspapers are not tribunals, they are not even part of the justice system, they are nothing more than chit-chat and there is people being ruined by chit-chat.
> *The majority of people when they are in power tend to abuse that power* (sexually and/or otherwise) and no media bubble will change human nature, you don't need to be a Berlusconi or a Weinstein to do that, *every boss at whatever level does that*.
> ...


I don't know where you get that. Do some? Yes, of course. Could it be "many?" Yes, it certainly is possible. "Majority" is a huge assumtpion, and there is never "every, all, or never." [See what I did there?]. My boss is one of the most decent men I have ever met. My brother who has over 250 employees in his company would never think of such a thing. He has his secretary (a woman) or his Business Manager (Another woman) in his office whenever he has to talk or discuss ANYTHING in private with another female employee. This is becoming more and more prevalent. It's a smart move.



Bulldog said:


> Jack - Concerning the guy slapping the server's butt in the restaurant, I do believe he deserves a few nights in jail. The guy needs to know that he can't put his hands on a woman's private parts without receiving a penalty; a little jail time is a mild response.


Slapping a butt deserves nights in jail? Wow. We have become hysterics in the west. I remember my Mother (God rest her soul) after watching a sexual harassment story on TV, telling me a story when she was in her young 20's working as a secretary in an office (this was back in the late 1950's). A man (manager) grabbed her butt. She turned around, slapped him across the face, and said not quietly, "Don't you EVER do that again!" He never did, nor did anyone other man in that company.

She then went on and made a great point: She said she has to laugh when she watches these women who are college educated, and proclaim how "independent" and "strong" they are, yet will emotionally crumble and cry at the sight of a swim suit calender hanging in the work place claiming a "hostile" work environment, or when a guy slaps them on the rear. She understood that there are classless, disgusting, and aggressive men who have no idea how to treat a woman with respect and dignity. She always said that you have to put these men in their place, period! She also said, that women were much stronger in her day, than they are now. I couldn't agree more.

And yes, she also understood that what happened to her and like harassments, are a far cry from the vile acts of threats of unemployment, withholdings of promotion, and worse.



eugeneonagain said:


> I'm not interested in gods. The law still has to deal with the concept of hidden sex crimes, it's a changing scenario. I doubt the case we are discussing is merely trial by media. No major orchestra would take that risk.


Are you sure about that? I'm sure some wouldn't, but in our social and political climate today, there are plenty who would. I'm not agreeing, but it would be a "safer" bet than not, to take that risk.



Eusebius12 said:


> Women demand to be believed and feminists passive-aggressively demand that sexual harassment become the only issue worthy of public interest almost. *There is a culture of silencing which is replacing the old culture of silence *(both are bad). I am not a lawyer but the presumption of innocence is a basic pillar of law, even when the accuser is a woman. Geoffrey Rush's reputation was trashed recently based on allegations of no credible nature. The culture of witchhunt seems to be perfectly acceptable when targeted at white men. That is no way to run a society. Let Gatti have his day in court. If the meeja can report and discuss this case, then others can comment on the general culture of metooism


Great post and that sentence I emboldened is fantastic! Well put.

One of the worst things people can do to fight an evil, is falsely claim such an evil has taken place. It dilutes and causes doubt whenever a genuine evil or wrong as taken place. Unfortunately, this is happening more and more. Most college campuses here in the US have now diluted the term "Sexual Assault" to "An unwanted kiss" or even "An unwelcome hand on a knee." Sorry, but that is NOT sexual assault. Physically holding down someone against their will and groping their privates above or below clothing is sexual assault (as one example). Rape consists of penetration. By diluting and overusing these terms when they do not apply does nothing but prevent the true victims of such horrific acts of obtaining any semblance of justice.

I do not know the details of the Gatti case, so I can not comment. Let the investigations play out and if he is guilty, then let him pay the price and let justice have it's day.

Being married to a woman who's ex-husband abused her both physically and sexually, doing work with my wife at abuse centers and with victims of such abuse, I know all too well the horrors that far too many women go through at home and at the work place, but convincing women that a man's unwanted hand on their boob or butt constitutes a valid state of traumatic victimhood for the rest of their lives is not doing any woman any favors. My wife grew strong from her experience, moved on, and is a very emotionally and mentally healthy woman (It's one of the things I love most about her). She, as well as I, would love to hear more stories about a slap in the face, a stern verbal warning, and a moving on with life from women who are not "victims." We would also like to hear less stories about scumbag men who have no clue on how to treat women with respect and dignity.

As for the true victims, my work, support, and prayers are all I have.

V


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Varick said:


> Slapping a butt deserves nights in jail? Wow.


It is a physical assault.


----------



## Madiel (Apr 25, 2018)

Art Rock said:


> In almost nine years of TC membership, this was the first thread of mine that was closed down, even if just temporarily. A special moment. I thank all of you who contributed to the discussion in unapproved way to have made this possible.


Glad to make you glad :tiphat:
This is a political argument, the fact that it is a news regarding the classical music world does not change that.
If we cannot discuss politics in the classical music section, then this entire thread should have disappeared, there is not a single post in this thread which is not a political one, it requires an amazing amount of hypocrisy to state otherwise.
At the end of the day the only posts which have been erased by the moderators were my posts.
I could have understood the disappearance of the posts where I expressed my disgust for the foreign policy of the US, they were political post unrelated to what we were discussing, but when I see a political thread still open, with all its political comments still around, except mine (the posts where I tried to explain my life experience leading me to hold the point of view that I hold about these arguments), what can I say? I get the message, and it is a personal message, a ban would have been more honorable, no hard feelings but good-bye TC :tiphat:


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

Varick said:


> I do not know the details of the Gatti case, so I can not comment.


Yet you make plenty of comment.



> but convincing women that a man's unwanted hand on their boob or butt constitutes a valid state of traumatic victimhood for the rest of their lives is not doing any woman any favors.


What has this to do with the Gatti case?

Madiel states:



> there is not a single post in this thread which is not a political one


Nonsense.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Although Madiel did raise my ire with his negative comments about U.S. foreign policy, I'm sorry to see him go. I hope he reconsiders - come back Madiel!


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

MacLeod said:


> Yet you make plenty of comment.


Uhh, not regarding specifically about the Gatti case. It's all tied in to the bigger issue at hand regarding Sexual misconduct. Is that not easily understood?



MacLeod said:


> What has this to do with the Gatti case?


 It doesn't. It has to do with many comments made throughout the thread. Is that also not easily understood??

V


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

-------How to say goodbye--------


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Varick said:


> One of the worst things people can do to fight an evil, is falsely claim such an evil has taken place. It dilutes and causes doubt whenever a genuine evil or wrong as taken place. Unfortunately, this is happening more and more. Most college campuses here in the US have now diluted the term "Sexual Assault" to "An unwanted kiss" or even "An unwelcome hand on a knee." Sorry, but that is NOT sexual assault. Physically holding down someone against their will and groping their privates above or below clothing is sexual assault (as one example). Rape consists of penetration. By diluting and overusing these terms when they do not apply does nothing but prevent the true victims of such horrific acts of obtaining any semblance of justice.
> 
> I do not know the details of the Gatti case, so I can not comment. Let the investigations play out and if he is guilty, then let him pay the price and let justice have it's day.
> 
> ...


you are making many of the same points that I've been trying to make. I've seen real victims of real crimes, so excuse me if I seem to have less empathy for women who feel traumatized that some macho man put a hand on their butt. In fact, I do not believe that they are traumatized. The experience might have been an unpleasant one, that is for sure, but not psychologically damaging like real victim of rape (developing PTSD, borderline disorder after abuse in childhood etc). The people in the west are getting soft (is snoflake the right term for it?), ie they melt at every minor hardship or inconvenience in life and run to lawyers/state/company regulations for protection. They seem incapable to dealing with problems directly in a confrontational manner, like in your example of slapping the man in his face. Men make advances on women because it is their nature and every women has to learn how to deal with unwanted advances of men, even the more intrusive ones, it is a basic social skill for women. I am not advocating harrasment. I personally respect and like women and have never harrased any. I just recognize that there are different levels of seriousness of it. Matt Daemon made some similar comments and was almost crucified by the mass hysteria of the PC crowd
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...ssault-harvey-weinstein-affleck-a8123021.html


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Jacck said:


> you are making many of the same points that I've been trying to make. I've seen real victims of real crimes, so excuse me if I seem to have less empathy for women who feel traumatized that some macho man put a hand on their butt. In fact, I do not believe that they are traumatized. The experience might have been an unpleasant one, that is for sure, but not psychologically damaging like real victim of rape (developing PTSD, borderline disorder after abuse in childhood etc). The people in the west are getting soft (is snoflake the right term for it?), ie they melt at every minor hardship or inconvenience in life and run to lawyers/state/company regulations for protection. They seem incapable to dealing with problems directly in a confrontational manner, like in your example of slapping the man in his face. *Men make advances on women because it is their nature and every women has to learn how to deal with unwanted advances of men, even the more intrusive ones, it is a basic social skill for women. I am not advocating harrasment.* I personally respect and like women and have never harrased any. I just recognize that there are different levels of seriousness of it. Matt Daemon made some similar comments and was almost crucified by the mass hysteria of the PC crowd
> https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...ssault-harvey-weinstein-affleck-a8123021.html


It is asinine to require women to resort to violence to stop inappropriate touching in the work place. A man in the office slapping women on the butt should be immediately dismissed. If a woman wishes to respond physically, the proper move is a hard kick to the testicles.

And yes, you sort of are advocating harassment.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

EdwardBast said:


> It is asinine to require women to resort to violence to stop inappropriate touching in the work place. A man in the office slapping women on the butt should be immediately dismissed. If a woman wishes to respond physically, the proper move is a hard kick to the testicles. And yes, you sort of are advocating harassment.


face slapping is an extreme measure. Most of the time a "NO" said with the proper intonation and a harsh look should be enough. If it is not enough, then use threats of going public etc. And then use some common sense. If a man invites you to a hotel or his private quaters, that should already ring some bells. A lot of these young damsels in Hollywood had to know what was going to happen, if a producer invited them to a hotel room.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

DaveM said:


> -------How to say goodbye--------


Don't ask me why, but I could not stop laughing during that entire video!!!

V


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

EdwardBast said:


> It is asinine to require women to resort to violence to stop inappropriate touching in the work place. A man in the office slapping women on the butt should be immediately dismissed. If a woman wishes to respond physically, the proper move is a hard kick to the testicles.
> 
> And yes, you sort of are advocating harassment.


No, he is not in any way, shape, or form "sort of" or otherwise, advocating harassment. I can't even begin to comprehend how you infer such a message.

This idea that "all" violence is or should be verboten is asinine. It can often be an immediately understood language and message that does not have to be excruciating, damaging, or traumatic (such as a hard kick to the testicles). A slap across the face (especially in front of people) is such a powerful response to such a disgusting and humiliating act of a butt or breast grab, that if more people would respond in such ways, I would bet big money a lot of this misconduct would stop.

We want to claim that we are becoming more civilized with all our laws that we enact day after day, but it was a much more civilized society when a man knew he was either going to get a slap across the face, a drink thrown in his face, or maybe even a husband's, boyfriend's, or even a decent man's, who witnessed the act, fist in the face if he acted a certain way towards a woman. Back then, the violator would go home, lick his wounds, and think the next time before he acted in such a way. And that would be the end of it.

Now if a woman or man did such a thing, everyone knows it's probably going to become a law suit that will be in favor of the scumbag who can't keep his hands to himself. And we call this "more civilized." The lack of wisdom that permeates our society is only growing.

V


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

I'm a bit confused; why are we talking about how a victim of harassment or assault should respond? I thought this was about Gatti, why the behaviour he exhibited created a bad work environment and what can be done to ensure that people don't behave like him.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

shirime said:


> I'm a bit confused; why are we talking about how a victim of harassment or assault should respond?


It's just guys defending other guys who behave badly.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Jacck said:


> The people in the west are getting soft (is snoflake the right term for it?), ie they melt at every minor hardship or inconvenience in life and run to lawyers/state/company regulations for protection. They seem incapable to dealing with problems directly in a confrontational manner, like in your example of slapping the man in his face...


-------Whatever-------


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> It is a physical assault.


I think that if anyone intentionally touches anyone anywhere without the person's consent, they should be able to press charges. Obviously there are benign examples like a friendly pat on the back, but slapping someone's butt, regardless of anyone's gender, is NOT an appropriate first move or a casual friendly gesture to do to an acquaintance. The person is either intending to sexually and physically assault the person, or it's a "joke" by means of assault, neither of which are okay unless you actually know that the other person is okay with it.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Sonata said:


> Sure there is. But again, the topic at hand with Gotti......that's not what's going on. If an employee is stirring up this much trouble, IF the allegations have merit, then releasing him is appropriate. They are not being litigious.


The place where that is determined is the courtroom.



> Yes victimhood has gone too far. But so has abuse of power and it's strange that you are not up in arms over that. These people are not calling for the hangman's noose, they are calling for a safe atmosphere to work!


Do you know the veracity of the claims yourself?


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Bulldog said:


> It's just guys defending other guys who behave badly.


It's presumption of guilt as usual, accompanied by virtue signalling for the most part.


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> It's just guys defending other guys who behave badly.


I don't think anyone in their right mind would support harassment or assault. It's indefensible.


----------



## Guest (Aug 5, 2018)

Eusebius12 said:


> It's presumption of guilt as usual, accompanied by virtue signalling for the most part.


What is virtue signalling?


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Fredx2098 said:


> I think that if anyone intentionally touches anyone anywhere without the person's consent, they should be able to press charges. Obviously there are benign examples like a friendly pat on the back, but slapping someone's butt, regardless of anyone's gender, is NOT an appropriate first move or a casual friendly gesture to do to an acquaintance. The person is either intending to sexually and physically assault the person, or it's a "joke" by means of assault, neither of which are okay unless you actually know that the other person is okay with it.


Should it end someone's career and become a subsequent media circus? This type of thing is totally unbalanced. It is society run by clickbait. Why the prurient interest as well? There are millions of homeless people. Do they deserve a safe place to live? You cannot enforce a perfect life for everyone (especially like this when it is enforced so selectively). Does it become international news every time a homeless man is stabbed, or a desperate man commits suicide? The victimhood industry really needs to reassess its priorities. While at the same time, genuine predators are protected for years by their 'allies'. The current #metoo epidemic might be a reaction, an overreaction to this, but quite likely innocent victims of #metoo (the falsely accused, of which there already seem to have been some) will suffer just like victims of abuse will. This has nothing specific to do with Gatti because I am not the investigating officer(s) or victims or Gatti or potential witnesses, I have no idea whether he is guilty and neither to be honest do any of you.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

shirime said:


> What is virtue signalling?


Demonstrating how 'right' you are by piling on to the latest moral panic or holier than thou bandwagon. For example, 'you go girl, I applaud your courageous working to end racism by calling for white male genocide', or 'I condemn this sexist bully on twitter with the 200000 other twits calling for you to be sacked and essentially hounded for the rest of your life because you say something I disagree with politically'.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Eusebius12 said:


> Should it end someone's career and become a subsequent media circus? This type of thing is totally unbalanced. It is society run by clickbait. Why the prurient interest as well? There are millions of homeless people. Do they deserve a safe place to live? You cannot enforce a perfect life for everyone (especially like this when it is enforced so selectively). Does it become international news every time a homeless man is stabbed, or a desperate man commits suicide? The victimhood industry really needs to reassess its priorities. While at the same time, genuine predators are protected for years by their 'allies'. The current #metoo epidemic might be a reaction, an overreaction to this, but quite likely innocent victims of #metoo (the falsely accused, of which there already seem to have been some) will suffer just like victims of abuse will. This has nothing specific to do with Gatti because I am not the investigating officer(s) or victims or Gatti or potential witnesses, I have no idea whether he is guilty and neither to be honest do any of you.


To do that in the workplace shows an unprofessional attitude, and if it isn't uncommon behavior then I wouldn't want that person working for me. I'm strongly against sensationalist media which (at least American) society completely revolves around. Being fired is enough; they don't need their name and face spread around the general public as a sex criminal. There's definitely a lot of overreaction to fairly harmless crimes that causes more harm than good, but just because there are greater injustices doesn't mean that lesser ones should be ignored and allowed. I'm not talking about the Gatti situation either, just about people saying that a man slapping a woman's butt out of the blue is normal and appropriate.


----------



## Guest (Aug 6, 2018)

Eusebius12 said:


> Demonstrating how 'right' you are by piling on to the latest moral panic or holier than thou bandwagon. For example, 'you go girl, I applaud your courageous working to end racism by calling for white male genocide', or 'I condemn this sexist bully on twitter with the 200000 other twits calling for you to be sacked and essentially hounded for the rest of your life because you say something I disagree with politically'.


I don't think there's anything in this thread which looks like the examples you mention.

Do you think 'virtue signalling' is worse than sexual harassment and assault?


----------



## R3PL4Y (Jan 21, 2016)

It's really sad that these kinds of things are still happening, but at least we can be glad that women are starting to feel more comfortable coming forward so we can hopefully make this kind of behavior a thing of the past, at least in the classical music community.


----------



## Sonata (Aug 7, 2010)

Eusebius12 said:


> The place where that is determined is the courtroom.


But you are wrong. That is NOT how most companies work. They don't decide in a court room who they continue to employ. some large companies, perhaps including an orchestra, may have a lawyer with whom they seek legal counsel, but NO they don't take it to a courtroom before they choose to fire someone.

If an employee feels they were wrongfully terminated, then THEY may take it to the court


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Fredx2098 said:


> To do that in the workplace shows an unprofessional attitude, and if it isn't uncommon behavior then I wouldn't want that person working for me. I'm strongly against sensationalist media which (at least American) society completely revolves around. Being fired is enough; they don't need their name and face spread around the general public as a sex criminal. There's definitely a lot of overreaction to fairly harmless crimes that causes more harm than good, but just because there are greater injustices doesn't mean that lesser ones should be ignored and allowed. I'm not talking about the Gatti situation either, just about people saying that a man slapping a woman's butt out of the blue is normal and appropriate.


I may have missed it, but where did someone say or even imply that slapping a woman's butt is "normal" and especially "appropriate?" Perhaps someone alluded to that a man's "desire" to grab a woman's butt is normal (which I believe it is), but it is certainly not a "normal" behavior. Only a small minority (thank God) of men act that low. I have certainly not seen anything on this thread where someone alluded to, let alone said, that it's *"appropriate."*

V


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Varick said:


> I may have missed it, but where did someone say or even imply that slapping a woman's butt is "normal" and especially "appropriate?" Perhaps someone alluded to that a man's "desire" to grab a woman's butt is normal (which I believe it is), but it is certainly not a "normal" behavior. Only a small minority (thank God) of men act that low. I have certainly not seen anything on this thread where someone alluded to, let alone said, that it's *"appropriate."*
> 
> V


Perhaps posts #8 and 13


----------



## Guest (Aug 6, 2018)

Varick said:


> Uhh, not regarding specifically about the Gatti case. It's all tied in to the bigger issue at hand regarding Sexual misconduct. Is that not easily understood?
> 
> It doesn't. It has to do with *many comments made throughout the thread*. Is that also not easily understood??
> 
> V


It seems to me that 'many comments throughout the thread' are wildly off-topic in the sense that they infer things from the Gatti case that are wholly unjustified. This is a thread about the specifics of a revelation about the alleged behaviours of a leading conductor. It's not about

victimhood
rape
politics
feminism
false claims (unless anyone has any knowledge that this applies in this case)
media hysteria

In fact, beyond the initial newsworthiness, I'm not sure it's about much else other than the fact that the classical world is no different than any other field of endeavour. It's certainly not worth ten pages of speculation about whether the accusers made it up, and whether anything short of rape should be dealt with by a slap in the face.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

One would expect his employer to conduct a thorough inquiry into these allegations. Hearing his side of the story as well. To fire him based on what people say in the media would be wrong. Then you could ruin anyone's career by throwing around random accusations. In this case it appears something did happen considering Gatti's reponse.
So, if a proper inquiry was held and there were grounds for dismissal then there's not much more to say. If the allegations are false, or do not justify dismissal then it's up to Gatti to try and clear his name in court.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> It seems to me that 'many comments throughout the thread' are wildly off-topic in the sense that they infer things from the Gatti case that are wholly unjustified. This is a thread about the specifics of a revelation about the alleged behaviours of a leading conductor. It's not about
> victimhood
> rape
> politics
> ...


None of us knows much about the Gatti case, so if you want to restrict the discussion to the Gatti case only, then the discussion is over because there is nothing more to discuss. I made my stance to the Gatti case clear: we do no not know much, so should not make strong judgements. If indeed several women came forward with such accusations and if they are true, and if there are current members of the Dutch orchestra, who complained about his inappropriate behavior, that the management were right in their decision to fire him. But there are this ifs and doubts and uncertainty. 
And then we can have a general discussion about this whole sexual harrassment movement. I would certainly love to live in a world, where women have to make the advances, the ask us out, to initiate contant, to initiate kisses, to initiate sex. There are so many blurred lines here and most of these things happen based on nonverbal consent. If a women likes your advances, you are welcome, if she does not, you are harrassing her. And what is considered harrassment (especially by these extremist feminist movements) has been constantly shifting. Now you are harrassing her if you ask her for a date twice. In a couple of years, we will send men to prison, because they raped a woman with their harrassing looks. 
And there are extreme bullies among these PC crowds, who demand appologies from people just for voicing a different opinion. I feel harrassed by these people. 
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/life/...ng-2018-more-backlash-and-pushback/880479001/


----------



## Guest (Aug 6, 2018)

Jacck said:


> None of us knows much about the Gatti case, so if you want to restrict the discussion to the Gatti case only, then the discussion is over because there is nothing more to discuss. I made my stance to the Gatti case clear: we do no not know much, so should not make strong judgements.


Exactly so. Yet some, including you, have chosen to infer things about the case - such as whether the accusers are making it up - to make a generalised case about women who make things up. Or about whether things have got so bad that men can't make advances to women any more without worrying they will be accused of assault...

...oh, look...



Jacck said:


> But there are this ifs and doubts and uncertainty.
> And then we can have a general discussion about this whole sexual harrassment movement. I would certainly love to live in a world, where women have to make the advances, the ask us out, to initiate contant, to initiate kisses, to initiate sex. There are so many blurred lines here and most of these things happen based on nonverbal consent. If a women likes your advances, you are welcome, if she does not, you are harrassing her. And what is considered harrassment (especially by these extremist feminist movements) has been constantly shifting. Now you are harrassing her if you ask her for a date twice. In a couple of years, we will send men to prison, because they raped a woman with their harrassing looks.


I simply think that this is an inappropriate treatment of the OP. By all means refer to the content of the link in the OP, and, from there, to the issues raised in the Washington Post article. There's plenty of meat there if you want to discuss the actual issues rather than soapboxing about hypothetical ones.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> Exactly so. Yet some, including you, have chosen to infer things about the case - such as whether the accusers are making it up - to make a generalised case about women who make things up. Or about whether things have got so bad that men can't make advances to women any more without worrying they will be accused of assault....


No, I have not inferred things about the case. From the beginning I tried to argue that things might not be black and white. And the women making up the accusations is a possibility (not a certainty!). I am simply a little scared by this idea of mob justice. Sometimes you can see in in Africa: an angry mob lynching alledged thiefs/rapists/witches/adulterers and without a due process and any possibility of a just defense.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

shirime said:


> I don't think there's anything in this thread which looks like the examples you mention.
> 
> Do you think 'virtue signalling' is worse than sexual harassment and assault?


Of course not, although in some instances it can be nauseating and hypocritical.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Sonata said:


> But you are wrong. That is NOT how most companies work. They don't decide in a court room who they continue to employ. some large companies, perhaps including an orchestra, may have a lawyer with whom they seek legal counsel, but NO they don't take it to a courtroom before they choose to fire someone.
> 
> If an employee feels they were wrongfully terminated, then THEY may take it to the court


Yes well if the allegations were proved wrong in court, he would have grounds for wrongful dismissal. To often though the cart is put before the horse, in the sense that sort of kangaroo courts become judge jury and executioner. And the public and media can be such 'courts'


----------



## Guest (Aug 6, 2018)

Jacck said:


> No, I have not inferred things about the case.


Really?



> So some 60+ years old women long past blossom now come out with a story and it is enough to fire him.


 your post #2



> Women complain 30 years after the incident that he groped them in a dressing room? Why come with it now? Attention seeking? Greed? Personal revenge? What is the motive?


 your post #15

And, so you don't feel picked on...



> why the RCO fired Gatti? they will tour the US next year so they need to avoid even the hint of a blemish on their public image. This is advertising, it has nothing to do with morals/respect/whatever, in the real world and in real workplaces people continue to be harassed (men and women, sexually or not) every day as it has always been and as it will always be, like it or not that's human nature.


 madiel post #5


----------



## Guest (Aug 6, 2018)

Eusebius12 said:


> Of course not, although in some instances it can be nauseating and hypocritical.


So would you support Gatti or the people he harassed?


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

shirime said:


> So would you support Gatti or the people he harassed?


i support truth, justice and fair treatment for everyone and a punishment befitting the seriousness of the crime. I know neither Gatti nor his accusers, so cannot really side with either party. If the allegations are true, it depends on the context. If he abused power in the sense offering job promotion in exchange for sexual services, he deserves to be fired.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

While it has happened that the accusations of a single woman of having been assaulted or raped by a man she knows or works with have turned out to be false, I have yet to hear of a case where several women in a workplace, or working environment (eg. actresses) have made accusations against the same man that turned out to be false.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

DaveM said:


> While it has happened that the accusations of a single woman of having been assaulted or raped by a man she knows or works with have turned out to be false, I have yet to hear of a case where several women in a workplace, or working environment (eg. actresses) have made accusations against the same man that turned out to be false.


false rape accusations could be as high as 50%. I know some policemen here locally and they told the the majority of reported rapes are fake. Women can do it for different reasons, as a revenge to their partner, to use as an argument before court when quarreling for children custody. Another common reason are young teenage girls, when they got drunk or pregnant etc and are afraid to tell their parents the truth, so they make up stories. The wiki kind of confirms it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Police_on_false_rape

Here is another story of a false/revenge accusation - The Humiliation of Aziz Ansari 
https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2018/01/the-humiliation-of-aziz-ansari/550541/

but you are right, that when several successful women accuse someone (for example a producer) then they are probably right


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> If he abused power in the sense offering job promotion in exchange for sexual services, he deserves to be fired.


He has power, they (the women in these cases) do not. He doesn't have to offer promotion (to what - Concertmaster for a flute player?) or threaten dire consequences to abuse that power. He just has to behave badly. They (the women) may perceive risks to their careers by going public and, indeed, they may incur these now that they have. It doesn't need to be overt - it can be just whispered memories that they are trouble makers (for example). And this is on top of all the well-known reasons for women being reluctant to report sexual offenses against them (will they be believed? will they be blamed? will they be seen as feeble victims because they didn't slap the man? etc etc etc).

I am shocked that you do not know this and cannot arrive at it through use of your knowledge of the world and a little imagination. I suspect you are a victim of right wing websites and fake news.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Jacck said:


> false rape accusations could be as high as 50%. I know some policemen here locally and they told the the majority of reported rapes are fake. Women can do it for different reasons, as a revenge to their partner, to use as an argument before court when quarreling for children custody. Another common reason are young teenage girls, when they got drunk or pregnant etc and are afraid to tell their parents the truth, so they make up stories. The wiki kind of confirms it
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape#Police_on_false_rape
> 
> Here is another story of a false/revenge accusation - The Humiliation of Aziz Ansari
> ...


The largest study ( Kelly et al. (2005) ) put the number of false claims in the USA at 3%.

Most of the studies put the figure under 20% and only those studies of less than 100 put the figure over 30%.

The wiki only confirms that there are false allegations and states some of the reasons, research etc.


----------



## larold (Jul 20, 2017)

A follow-up story elsewhere said this:

"A statement from the orchestra said: 'Since the publication of the article in the Washington Post, a number of female colleagues of the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra reported experiences with Gatti which are inappropriate considering his position as chief conductor. 

'This has irreparably damaged the relationship of trust between the orchestra and the chief conductor.'

Milan-born Gatti, 56, initially issued an apology to the Washington Post. 

'To all the women I have met in my entire life, especially those who believe I did not treat them with the utmost respect and dignity they certainly deserve, I sincerely apologise from the bottom of my heart,' he said." END STORY

With sexual harassment taking on more importance in recent years and with plenty of powerful men in world class orchestras, Hollywood, the United States Senate and the White House losing and resigning from their jobs over charges similar to these, it should be no surprise Gatti was let go. He had other problems with orchestras before this relative to his temper tantrums.

In the atmosphere that exists over sexual harassment in this century, Gatti's apology, as cited by the Washington Post, is essentially his admission that he did the things he was charged with.

I read a piece in a classical music magazine a few months back about the similar fates James Levine and Charles Dutoit met. The story said Levine "apparently liked little boys." The author of the article said, whatever they did, they should be remembered for their artistry.

I think maybe that would have happened in the world of the 20th century, or maybe even in the world up to 2005, but no longer. The world of orchestra conductors was full of sexual harassers for years; Stokowski was legendary for it. Many others did it and players put up with it. It was the price a woman paid to participate in a male-dominated world.

No longer. We're in a new century now and the crime of sexual harassment is finally a crime, no longer cast aside as something meaningless. An incident such as Gatti's tends to wipe away whatever art may have been created. What is left is the final accounting.

There will be more of these cases I'm sure.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> He has power, they (the women in these cases) do not. He doesn't have to offer promotion (to what - Concertmaster for a flute player?) or threaten dire consequences to abuse that power. He just has to behave badly. They (the women) may perceive risks to their careers by going public and, indeed, they may incur these now that they have. It doesn't need to be overt - it can be just whispered memories that they are trouble makers (for example). And this is on top of all the well-known reasons for women being reluctant to report sexual offenses against them (will they be believed? will they be blamed? will they be seen as feeble victims because they didn't slap the man? etc etc etc). I am shocked that you do not know this and cannot arrive at it through use of your knowledge of the world and a little imagination. I suspect you are a victim of right wing websites and fake news.


I agree with you. If he indeed behaved badly, he should be fired. He simply cannot behave from his position in such a manner. I doubt that I am a victim of right-wing websites. I would certainly not have voted that thing into the White House. But I can say I dislike feminism (only the 3rd and 4th wave), identity politics, political correctness (silencing oponents), on the other hand I dislike global warming denialists, dislike gun lovers, I am for abortions, I am for ecology. So I have opinions picked from both parts of the ideological divide. I am a liberal, but in the true meaning of the word, not the antiliberal movements of the american left.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Fredx2098 said:


> Perhaps posts #8 and 13


 Posts #8 & 13 made no mention of "acceptance." Now..., Re: Normal behavior, in it's context it was stated that these are normal reactions/desires from men (which they are), not normal behavior. I can't read his mind, but I highly doubt the author meant, "meh, it's normal, what's the big deal?" Especially given his post after those.



MacLeod said:


> It seems to me that 'many comments throughout the thread' are wildly off-topic in the sense that they infer things from the Gatti case that are wholly unjustified. This is a thread about the specifics of a revelation about the alleged behaviours of a leading conductor. It's not about
> 
> victimhood
> rape
> ...


It's all related McLeod. There are implications from this story that have affected all of Western culture. It's been in a few papers in case you haven't noticed. We are discussing and debating important issues from this ONE PARTICULAR story. Issues that have ramifications to society writ large. This happens with almost every post. It also happens in almost every personal conversation with any group of people I have ever been with. Are you social? Do you get out? Have you noticed this pattern of human behavior?

So, if I talk about my son's friend who died last year of a heroin overdose, everyone is supposed to stay ONLY on my son's friend? No one should talk about or discuss the heroin epidemic that is happening throughout the US?? Wow. I'm sure you're a nice guy, and I'm willing to meet anyone face to face, have a drink or a coffee with, get to know, etc. But I might have to think twice, if I have the opportunity, to meet with you. I would hate to think that if we started talking about Queen Elizabeth, it would be verboten if the conversation evolved to discussing the history of the English Monarchy because we jumped ship from SPECIFICALLY Queen Elizabeth.



MacLeod said:


> It's certainly not worth ten pages of speculation about whether the accusers made it up, and whether anything short of rape should be dealt with by a slap in the face.


And whoever said anything short of rape should be dealt with by a slap in the face? Certainly not I. I choose my words carefully MacLeod (at least I try very hard), so don't try to read into what I say, because like in your example above, you'll probably be very wrong.

V


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Varick said:


> Posts #8 & 13 made no mention of "acceptance." Now..., Re: Normal behavior, in it's context it was stated that these are normal reactions/desires from men (which they are), not normal behavior. I can't read his mind, but I highly doubt the author meant, "meh, it's normal, what's the big deal?" Especially given his post after those.


He directly referred to slapping a woman's butt, without any given context, as "normal male sexual behavior" and a "normal male sexual advance" and that it is not harassment, on the same level as opening a door for someone. If something is normal and not harassment, then that behavior is implied to be acceptable.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Fredx2098 said:


> He directly referred to slapping a woman's butt, without any given context, as "normal male sexual behavior" and a "normal male sexual advance" and that it is not harassment, on the same level as opening a door for someone. If something is normal and not harassment, then that behavior is implied to be acceptable.


Sorry, but you and I have a very different read on the post. He went further in giving the example of opening a door for someone is now considered at least "sexist" if it's for a woman. Not equating the two. I may be wrong, you may be right on this. But there is nothing that I read in his post that suggests that HE suggests that slapping a woman's butt is "acceptable."

V


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Varick said:


> Sorry, but you and I have a very different read on the post. He went further in giving the example of opening a door for someone is now considered at least "sexist" if it's for a woman. Not equating the two. I may be wrong, you may be right on this. But there is nothing that I read in his post that suggests that HE suggests that slapping a woman's butt is "acceptable."
> 
> V


How do you interpret the posts I referred to? I only see one way to interpret them.

"What is sexual harassment? It is all a matter of degree. Rape is on all accounts wrong and should be harshly punished. But when a man slaps women on her butt? Or when he opens doors for her? [...] Normal male sexual behavior is now looked upon as harassment. [...] I can imagine normal male sexual advances being misrepresented as sexual harassment."

You're defending this? Going on to say something about sexism isn't related to those posts, unless he was backing off from what he said, which I don't see.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Fredx2098 said:


> He directly referred to slapping a woman's butt, without any given context, as "normal male sexual behavior" and a "normal male sexual advance" and that it is not harassment, on the same level as opening a door for someone. If something is normal and not harassment, then that behavior is implied to be acceptable.


I am certain that the relationships between men and women and what is considered normal and what not are different in Czech Republic and in the US. Flirting, compliments, sexual jokes, touches etc. are quite common and not really considered pathological here. Butt slapping is not that common and depends on the context. If the two know each other, then it might be perfectly acceptable. If they dont then it would be considered harassing, but no women would call police because of it. 
The most dangerous kind of harassing that we all can agree is bad, is sexual harassing as an abuse of power, ie when a boss/conductor/professor etc. harrasses his subordinates/students etc. That is not acceptable and should be fought. 
The problem is that we here in Europe read this bizarre stories from the US/Australia/Canada etc where the anti-harrassment movement has gone too far and even normal flirting between the genders is considered as harrasing and are a little appaled at it, because it poisons the normal relationships between the genders. Hence you get reactions like the letter of 100 French women 
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/10/europe/catherine-deneuve-france-letter-metoo-intl/index.html


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Jacck said:


> I am certain that the relationships between men and women and what is considered normal and what not are different in Czech Republic and in the US. Flirting, compliments, sexual jokes, touches etc. are quite common and not really considered pathological here. Butt slapping is not that common and depends on the context. If the two know each other, then it might be perfectly acceptable. If they dont then it would be considered harassing, but no women would call police because of it.
> The most dangerous kind of harassing that we all can agree is bad, is sexual harassing as an abuse of power, ie when a boss/conductor/professor etc. harrasses his subordinates/students etc. That is not acceptable and should be fought.
> The problem is that we here in Europe read this bizarre stories from the US/Australia/Canada etc where the anti-harrassment movement has gone too far and even normal flirting between the genders is considered as harrasing and are a little appaled at it, because it poisons the normal relationships between the genders. Hence you get reactions like the letter of 100 French women
> https://edition.cnn.com/2018/01/10/europe/catherine-deneuve-france-letter-metoo-intl/index.html


It's definitely okay if the two people know each other and have that kind of relationship. I would not *begin* flirting with someone by touching them. I would talk to them and get to know them first, and if they seem interested then maybe I would go further. I think it should be that way for any combination of the genders of the people involved. I don't consider touching to be an appropriate first move, ever. I would consider it harassment. It could be received positively or *very* negatively, and I don't think that it's appropriate for anyone to do that right off the bat.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

Varick said:


> And whoever said anything short of rape should be dealt with by a slap in the face? Certainly not I. I choose my words carefully MacLeod (at least I try very hard), so don't try to read into what I say, because like in your example above, you'll probably be very wrong.


As my wife says to me on a regular basis, "It's not all about you!" (And it's not all about me either. Focus on my argument, not on whether I'm a nice guy, please).


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Fredx2098 said:


> It's definitely okay if the two people know each other and have that kind of relationship. I would not *begin* flirting with someone by touching them. I would talk to them and get to know them first, and if they seem interested then maybe I would go further. I think it should be that way for any combination of the genders of the people involved. I don't consider touching to be an appropriate first move, ever. I would consider it harassment. It could be received positively or *very* negatively, and I don't think that it's appropriate for anyone to do that right off the bat.


Of course I agree with you. It always begins non-verbally, ie looks etc, then conversation, then touches if the nonverbal signals allow it. The problem is that in the US/Australia/Canada the laws seem to be set in such a way as to always favor the women. It is enough that they complain they were harrassed, and the men is in serious trouble. Women are not more moral than men and will use and abuse this power if given opportunity (some of them, the immoral ones). Hence you have various accusations of sexual harrassment, American managers are afraid to be alone with a woman in one room, American professors are afraid to tutor students alone. The stakes are high, ie if falsely accused, it can ruin your life/career/reputation.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Varick said:


> Sorry, but you and I have a very different read on the post. He went further in giving the example of opening a door for someone is now considered at least "sexist" if it's for a woman. Not equating the two. I may be wrong, you may be right on this. But there is nothing that I read in his post that suggests that HE suggests that slapping a woman's butt is "acceptable."
> 
> V


I think it is worth looking more closely at Jaack's apologist post:

"What is sexual harrassment? It is all a matter of degree. Rape is on all accounts wrong and should be harshly punished.* But when a man slaps women on her butt? Or when he opens doors for her? Is this really such a serious offence as to be punishable by a destroyed career and family and reputation?* Normal male sexual behavior is now looked upon as harrassment (if the women wants to)"

He is indeed equating the two by suggesting the consequences could be the same. This is what we call - TRIVIALISATION of abuse - a well known strategy of apologists of abuse. The two acts are utterly different in nature - one is sexual physical assault and the other is an act of kindness that some feminists frown upon. Opening a door for a woman is in no way harassment. men will continue to open doors for women an indeed people tend to open doors for other people regardless of gender - it is a normal act of courtesy and will continue to be so. A man slapping a woman's bottom was always sexually demeaning assault, never normal behavior in that the vast of majority of men never did it and virtually always unwanted when they did. I know of no cases where women have complained of harassment after a man opened a door. Is a slapped bottom worth a destroyed career? A one off case? No probably not - but cases like these tend to detail a variety of multiple events over a period of time which involve touching, suggestive comments. coercion etc.

Dave Lee Travis had his reputation ruined over one touch of a woman's breast - this is an event which haunted the victim her entire life - did he deserve this outcome? Normal behavior? You decide.

*But there is nothing that I read in his post that suggests that HE suggests that slapping a woman's butt is "acceptable."
*

He thinks it is as acceptable as opening a door for a woman.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

I will totally refrain from quoting Nietzsche on the relationship of man to woman. He certainly had his issues, but being PC wasn't one of them.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

stomanek said:


> I know of no cases where women have complained of harassment after a man opened a door.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-hold-open-doors-women-SEXIST-chivalrous.html
you just have not read enough about the toxic ideology called 3rd wave feminism. Normally, people would just shrug them off as the obnoxious women they are, but the problem is that they are activists and are responsible for implementing some really bad policies that are discriminatory against men. Not to mention they themselves are extremly sexist (painting all men as rapist pigs) and hypocritical (using double standards)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/rel...Now-man-are-afraid-to-help-women-at-work.html


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Jacck said:


> Of course I agree with you. It always begins non-verbally, ie looks etc, then conversation, then touches if the nonverbal signals allow it. The problem is that in the US/Australia/Canada the laws seem to be set in such a way as to always favor the women. It is enough that they complain they were harrassed, and the men is in serious trouble. Women are not more moral than men and will use and abuse this power if given opportunity (some of them, the immoral ones). Hence you have various accusations of sexual harrassment, American managers are afraid to be alone with a woman in one room, American professors are afraid to tutor students alone. The stakes are high, ie if falsely accused, it can ruin your life/career/reputation.


I agree that the legal situation surrounding sexual harassment is ridiculous, at least in America which is all I know about. The American way seems to spread around the world though. If women blatantly lied to get him fired, that's awful. I don't think someone should be immediately terminated after an accusation, perhaps a "suspension pending investigation". Gatti apparently denies the allegations, so as far as I know there's no way to determine who's right and who's wrong. If the allegations are true and he had "his hands on my rear end, and his tongue down my throat" (from Washington Post), then that would definitely be grounds for termination.

In America, sexual harassment cases seem to be "guilty until proven innocent". I read story about a woman who claimed to have been raped, she was given a lineup of men who fit her description (something like "a tall black man"), she chose a random person, and they were sent to jail for many years, then after a few years, she came forward and said that she was lying and was never actually raped, and she didn't get in any trouble because too many years had passed. Also, the case at most colleges seems to be "expel first, ask questions never" if someone is accused of sexual harassment. A woman could choose any random male student and get them expelled just by claiming they were assaulted by him.

I don't think that any drastic action (termination, imprisoning, expelling) should be taken solely based on an accusation. It's strange how that is happening more and more now. I think I've read that the "reason" is so the "victim" doesn't feel interrogated and disbelieved, which is absurd. False sexual assault allegations have always been a way that vindictive women "get revenge" on men, and now it's enforced by law and reinforced by the media.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Jacck said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-hold-open-doors-women-SEXIST-chivalrous.html
> you just have not read enough about the toxic ideology called 3rd wave feminism. Normally, people would just shrug them off as the obnoxious women they are, but the problem is that they are activists and are responsible for implementing some really bad policies that are discriminatory against men. Not to mention they themselves are extremly sexist (painting all men as rapist pigs) and hypocritical (using double standards)
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/rel...Now-man-are-afraid-to-help-women-at-work.html


The issues posed by feminism have absolutely nothing to do with sexual assault as recognized by the law. It is not illegal to hold a door open for a woman and I know of no examples of men losing their jobs over this. Slapping a woman's bottom is sexual assault as recognised by the law (UK) - holding a door open for a woman may be frowned upon by some factions of feminism but is not an offence. You are either deliberately conflating two issues in order to cloud the waters and trivialize sexual assault or too obtuse to understand the difference.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

stomanek said:


> The issues posed by feminism have absolutely nothing to do with sexual assault as recognized by the law. It is not illegal to hold a door open for a woman and I know of no examples of men losing their jobs over this. Slapping a woman's bottom is sexual assault as recognised by the law (UK) - holding a door open for a woman may be frowned upon by some factions of feminism but is not an offence. You are either deliberately conflating two issues in order to cloud the waters and trivialize sexual assault or too obtuse to understand the difference.


I would not categorize "slapping on the butt" as assault. Assault means severe physical attack. But it is definitely a minor form of harrassment (if it is unwelcome and out of the right context). The appropriate punishment might be a day of public work, not losing his job/reputation/going to jail. The harm to the woman in such a case is minimal and hence the punishment should be minimal. There are much more serious forms of power abuse that go unpunished.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Fredx2098 said:


> I don't think that any drastic action (termination, imprisoning, expelling) should be taken solely based on an accusation. It's strange how that is happening more and more now. I think I've read that the "reason" is so the "victim" doesn't feel interrogated and disbelieved, which is absurd. False sexual assault allegations have always been a way that vindictive women "get revenge" on men, and now it's enforced by law and reinforced by the media.


it is a form of sexism/stereotypes about women/men. Women are seen as the weak fragile sex that is incapable of evil and is always the victim of the male agression. That is simply nonsense and the topic of female agression is a very interesting one if you delve into it. Domestic violence from women against men is almost as frequent as men against women. But women use mostly indirect forms of agression, such as rumor spreading etc. 
http://socialethology.com/tactics-of-female-aggression

this whole thing is definitely discriminatory against men, just google something like "false rape accusation ruined life" to real actual horror stories of destroyed lifes.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

stomanek said:


> He is indeed equating the two by suggesting the consequences could be the same.


Rereading those posts, I think, in fairness to Jacck, he is using two examples from along the spectrum of behaviours to ask what constitutes 'harassment'. I don't think he intends to present those specifics as equal. It's important to read the link he posted as a further illustration of his point.

While we're on the subject of whether opening a door for a woman might be considered "harassment", I suspect two issues are being conflated: one is about the nature of the relationship between men and women generally, the other about specific acts between individuals.

I worked with a colleague who always made a point of not going through a door I held open for her. She thanked me for my courtesy at an individual level, but said that the habit of men holding doors open for women was symbolic of the oppressive inequality in the male/female relationship. I took her point. It can be, whether I mean it to be or not. But not all women would see it that way, and I will continue to hold doors open for people (I'm not going to fret about whether they might see me as oppressing them). She was happy that I open doors for men too.

What is missing from the discussion in this thread is proper recognition of the importance of context and perception. So, if I regularly held open a door for a particular woman at work, but also showed other similar behaviours (fetching her coffee, helping her with her work at every opportunity, always wanting to sit next to her in meetings etc) there is a context for each of these single acts. Taken together, they might be liable to interpretation as a "come-on". She may perceive the acts as nothing more than kindness and friendliness; she may perceive them to be signals of sexual attraction, and she may then decide she needs to make a response (one way or another).

My point is that the "door-holding" act now has a context, and I need to recognise that whatever I intend may not be what is perceived.

As has already been said, we know little about the context for Gatti's alleged behaviours. The perception of the individuals concerned seems clear enough, and we are not in a position to judge whether what they allege is justified as assault/harassment. The fact that the orchestra management has judged their allegations (and the subsequent reports by others) to be justified isn't conclusive proof, but should count for something in our deciding whether to use this example as an illustration of how men are now being unfairly victimised when all they want to be able to do is exhibit normal sexual behaviour!


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

The articles referenced above from the _Daily Mail _and _Daily Telegraph _would need further examination - not least to check that the research they cite as being properly represented. The _Telegraph _article is particularly poorly written, and I wouldn't use it as evidence for anything other than the standard of journalism at that paper is declining. For example,



> Ludicrously, Elsesser cites examples of men who have been dragged in by their HR departments for simply opening a door for a female colleague or complimenting her on a new suit. "Stories like these spread around workplaces, instilling a fear that innocent remarks will be misinterpreted," she says.


Does that first word mean that Elsesser's citing is ludicrous? Or that the examples of "door-opening" are ludicrous? And, taken out of context, we don't know whether Elsesser is saying that these stories being spread are creating an unjustified fear, or a legitimate one. I think the heading to the article is a clear enough indication where the author stands, clearly biased on the issue.

[add]The Mail article headlines thus: "Men who hold open doors for women are SEXIST not chivalrous, feminists claim". Reading the research, however, I can find no mention of door holding!

http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0361684310397509


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

Jacck said:


> it is a form of sexism/stereotypes about women/men. Women are seen as the weak fragile sex that is incapable of evil and is always the victim of the male agression. That is simply nonsense and the topic of female agression is a very interesting one if you delve into it. Domestic violence from women against men is almost as frequent as men against women. But women use mostly indirect forms of agression, such as rumor spreading etc.
> http://socialethology.com/tactics-of-female-aggression
> 
> this whole thing is definitely discriminatory against men, just google something like "false rape accusation ruined life" to real actual horror stories of destroyed lifes.


The double-edged sexism is the horrible icing on the cake. These self-proclaimed feminists want to be empowered..... by being patronized by the legal system? It seems pretty obvious that the "third-wave feminists" are just anti-men, but the fact that it's actually having an effect on laws and the government is baffling. I've heard horrible stories about female-on-male rape and domestic violence. People claim that a male cannot be raped. I've read stories about men calling the police about actual physical domestic violence by a woman, and the police come and _arrest the man_. Any female-on-male assault is seen as a complete joke in America, while a woman can have a man sent to prison just by saying the word. If a man gets beaten up by a woman, he's a weakling and laughed at by everyone, and if he defends himself, he is ganged up on (there are terrifying videos of this happening) and arrested.

Hopefully we'll see which side of the Gatti situation is telling boldfaced lies eventually.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

At the risk of offending, I will mention that category of literature, much beloved by some ladies, called the "bodice ripper." The virile male is likely to seize the heroine by main force, carry her off, and ravish her. Perhaps repeatedly. The word "masterful" leaps to mind and it seems that a good time is had by all. Bookstores have large racks dedicated to these novels.

But the real question is, is it legal? Will this all end up in court? It certainly surpasses a whack on the buttocks…


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

The market for such products has been diminishing here for many years. Hardly any left nowadays.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

joen_cph said:


> The market for such products has been diminishing here for many years. Hardly any left nowadays.


Hmm... Looks like Amazon has about a hundred pages of them.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

KenOC said:


> much beloved by some *ladies*, called the "bodice ripper." The virile male is likely to seize the heroine by main force, carry her off, and ravish her. Perhaps repeatedly. The word "masterful" leaps to mind and it seems that a good time is had by all. Bookstores have large racks dedicated to these novels.


Your tongue may be in your cheek...but I'm pretty sure it doesn't justify your sexism, writ large. What point are you making here?


----------



## joen_cph (Jan 17, 2010)

> Hmm... Looks like Amazon has about a hundred pages of them.


Sure, English-speaking literature, but I´m thinking kiosks and shops here in Copenhagen. We don´t have a local Amazon even, yet. But that market is mainly for seniors, and they don´t buy foreign language ones, or via the internet.

I´m sure however there are some eccentric collectors out there.

Now, back in the Cartland decades - those were the days, and she got translated ...


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

shirime said:


> So would you support Gatti or the people he harassed?


I am not involved directly. Unless the allegations are proven, it would be more correct to say 'allegedly harassed'


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Enthusiast said:


> I am shocked that you do not know this and cannot arrive at it through use of your knowledge of the world and a little imagination. I suspect you are a victim of right wing websites and fake news.


This is a really weird set of statements to be honest. What does 'a little imagination' have to do with this?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

KenOC said:


> At the risk of offending, I will mention that category of literature, much beloved by some ladies, called the "bodice ripper." The virile male is likely to seize the heroine by main force, carry her off, and ravish her. Perhaps repeatedly. The word "masterful" leaps to mind and it seems that a good time is had by all. Bookstores have large racks dedicated to these novels.
> 
> But the real question is, is it legal? Will this all end up in court? It certainly surpasses a whack on the buttocks…


It is not uncommon for people to fantasise about things happening that they would not in any way welcome in real life! They may even enjoy acting it out but again that is just acting.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Heterosexual sex should be illegal, it is clearly demeaning to women. Sex on the LGBT spectrum should be 'rigidly' enforced


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-hold-open-doors-women-SEXIST-chivalrous.html
> you just have not read enough about the toxic ideology called 3rd wave feminism. Normally, people would just shrug them off as the obnoxious women they are, but the problem is that they are activists and are responsible for implementing some really bad policies that are discriminatory against men. Not to mention they themselves are extremly sexist (painting all men as rapist pigs) and hypocritical (using double standards)
> https://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/rel...Now-man-are-afraid-to-help-women-at-work.html


Those two newspapers are notorious for slanting news towards the far right (beyond what would generally be considered acceptable), both have form for misrepresenting the truth (some would call it lying) and neither has a good record for reporting the views or actions of others. The Daily Mail supported Hitler before the war and actively tried to promote a British Nazi Party. It hasn't changed so much since. I would avoid both of those sources if you want to know what is actually happening in the world.

On your post - if someone is an activist that suggests that they are not in a position to make or implement policy.


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Is it 'fake news'?


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Eusebius12 said:


> Is it 'fake news'?


From long before it was fashionable.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

*Rereading those posts, I think, in fairness to Jacck, he is using two examples from along the spectrum of behaviours to ask what constitutes 'harassment'. I don't think he intends to present those specifics as equal. It's important to read the link he posted as a further illustration of his point.*

And the reason he is wrong is that these two types of behaviour belong on different continuums. One is unwanted physical contact and the other is what some people may regard as a courtesy that is demeaning to women. I would suggest that slapping a bottom should be on a continuum as follows:

rape - attempted rape - serious sexual assault - minor sexual assault (intentional groping. slapping for sexual gratification)

I honestly dont see holding a door open anywhere on that spectrum. The above are all crimes. Perhaps I would put it on this scale:

Offering to pay for dinner on date - helping with coat on - holding door open.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

stomanek said:


> *Rereading those posts, I think, in fairness to Jacck, he is using two examples from along the spectrum of behaviours to ask what constitutes 'harassment'. I don't think he intends to present those specifics as equal. It's important to read the link he posted as a further illustration of his point.*
> 
> And the reason he is wrong is that these two types of behaviour belong on different continuums. One is unwanted physical contact and the other is what some people may regard as a courtesy that is demeaning to women.


Same continuum, I'd say, but that's Jackk's query isn't it? It rather depends what the "continuum" is. If it is "the range of behaviours that could be perceived as sexist ", they both belong. If it's "the range of behaviours perceived as physical assault", plainly they belong on different continuums. "Harassment" is a vaguer term, open to wider interpretation.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> The articles referenced above from the _Daily Mail _and _Daily Telegraph _would need further examination - not least to check that the research they cite as being properly represented. The _Telegraph _article is particularly poorly written, and I wouldn't use it as evidence for anything other than the standard of journalism at that paper is declining. For example,
> 
> Does that first word mean that Elsesser's citing is ludicrous? Or that the examples of "door-opening" are ludicrous? And, taken out of context, we don't know whether Elsesser is saying that these stories being spread are creating an unjustified fear, or a legitimate one. I think the heading to the article is a clear enough indication where the author stands, clearly biased on the issue.
> 
> ...


exactly - tatty journalism clickbait that is worthless.

Setting that aside - you can see how some feminists are doing women a disservice by attacking non invasive behavior of this type. As Jaack has illustrated - men who want to dismiss a whole class of assaults against women will cite the loony fem brigade and dismiss genuine concerns with the claim that fem has got out of control and men are now afraid to say boo lest they lose their jobs and be hung drawn and quartered.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> Same continuum, I'd say, but that's Jackk's query isn't it? It rather depends what the "continuum" is. If it is "the range of behaviours that could be perceived as sexist ", they both belong. If it's "the range of behaviours perceived as physical assault", plainly they belong on different continuums. "Harassment" is a vaguer term, open to wider interpretation.


Sexism and sex crimes are two different things. The law sees them differently.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

NB - there are several classes of assault in the eyes of the law (UK). Common assault tends to be that which leaves behind no injury and bottom slapping would certainly fit into that category. There is ABH assult - actual bodily harm - which is more serious. Bottom slapping would be sexual assault though due to the nature of it.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

stomanek said:


> exactly - tatty journalism clickbait that is worthless.
> Setting that aside - you can see how some feminists are doing women a disservice by attacking non invasive behavior of this type. As Jaack has illustrated - men who want to dismiss a whole class of assaults against women will cite the loony fem brigade and dismiss genuine concerns with the claim that fem has got out of control and men are now afraid to say boo lest they lose their jobs and be hung drawn and quartered.


yes, that is exactly my point. These excesses on the part of feminists (harrassment of men with BS) will have as a consequence that the actual, serious cases of harrassment/rape will not be taken seriously. Harrassment in the form of power abuse made by a superior is serious and needs to be fought. But this gets dilluted by women claiming harrassment that a collegue put a hand on their knee 20 years ago on a party while drunk (some extreme cases of the MeeToo movement)


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

stomanek said:


> Sexism and sex crimes are two different things. The law sees them differently.


So. ?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> So. ?


Slapping a woman's bottom is most certainly not an example of sexism and therefore does not belong on the same continuum of behaviour as opening a door and no I dont believe it was Jaack's point that the line has become confused due to feminist claims. He has repeated his view that a pat on the knee or slap on the bottom, 20 years ago - is a trivial matter - thus assuming that Gatti's behaviour that led to his sacking does not amount to much. We dont know exactly what he has been accused of but I understand multiple women have come forward to corroborate the initial allegations with their own reports of misconduct. He has of course hid behind the language frequently used by perpetrators "I always believed it was mutual but if I ever offended anyone" etc etc etc.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

stomanek said:


> Slapping a woman's bottom is most certainly not an example of sexism [...]


How about investigating definitions of sexism before making emphatic pronouncements?

https://www.britannica.com/topic/sexism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexism#Etymology_and_definitions


----------



## distantprommer (Sep 26, 2011)

Let's add a bit of humor into this discussion.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> How about investigating definitions of sexism before making emphatic pronouncements?
> 
> https://www.britannica.com/topic/sexism
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexism#Etymology_and_definitions


It's a huge topic. But the chief defining characteristic is *discrimination*. Some types of violence against women have been called sexist, rightly so - honour killings etc. Rape is argued to stem from misogyny. I did not have time to go through the whole of the wiki article but couldnt really find any definition that would allow a slap on the bottom to be termed sexist unless you want to say it is an example of objectification of women though I am not sure that is valid.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

distantprommer said:


> Let's add a bit of humor into this discussion.
> 
> View attachment 106458


70s humour eh. You were a fan of Benny Hill then?


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Varick said:


> No, he is not in any way, shape, or form "sort of" or otherwise, advocating harassment. I can't even begin to comprehend how you infer such a message.


Men make advances on women because it is their nature and every women has to learn how to deal with unwanted advances of men, even the more intrusive ones, it is a basic social skill for women. I am not advocating harrasment.

Let me help your comprehension: The poster who wrote the above was saying it is natural for men to make unwanted advances, which in context included physical assaults such as grabbing and slapping. He was comparing western women of today unfavorably with those of prior generations and other locales for not just slappng the offenders across the face or kicking them in the nuts. The message, in his own words:

"Men make advances on women because it is their nature … deal with [it]"


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

stomanek said:


> It's a huge topic. But the chief defining characteristic is *discrimination*.


"It's a huge topic" - but you nevertheless don't have time to read up on it and want to reduce it to a single word characteristic which, on its own, is meaningless. If you want my help with this, you should realise that discrimination only becomes evident in either word or deed. That is to say, any behaviour towards women that is based on discriminatory attitudes (that women are inferior) and should therefore be subject to treatment that reflects that inferiority. I think that includes treating women as sex objects.

If you're not prepared to engage more comprehensively with the discussion, perhaps you're not really in a postion to make personal declarations about what does and does not constitute sexist behaviour.

And can we please stop talking repeatedly about a "slap on the bottom" as if it were the single most important form of sexual assault?


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

distantprommer said:


> Let's add a bit of humor into this discussion.


Sure. Something a little more nuanced perhaps?


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

EdwardBast said:


> Men make advances on women because it is their nature and every women has to learn how to deal with unwanted advances of men, even the more intrusive ones, it is a basic social skill for women. I am not advocating harrasment.
> 
> Let me help your comprehension: The poster who wrote the above was saying it is natural for men to make unwanted advances, which in context included physical assaults such as grabbing and slapping. He was comparing western women of today unfavorably with those of prior generations and other locales for not just slappng the offenders across the face or kicking them in the nuts. The message, in his own words:
> 
> "Men make advances on women because it is their nature … deal with [it]"


you misrepresent me and I stand behind what I have written, but let me clarify. Women, especially the attractive ones, get constant attention from men - online, in class, at work, on the street etc. They get offers, they get invited, they get asked for telephone numbers etc. She cannot satisfy all, because it is impossible and maybe she does not want. So she has to learn the skill of how to reject men. Some of these men are tame, ask her politely once and leave her alone. Others can harass her because they cannot take no as a no. Also, there is flirting since puberty, including mutual touching. If the touching makes the woman uncomfortable, she has to learn how to say no. Most women know very well how to reject men and how to show them their boundaries. It is a social skill. If the men is intrusive, she can defend herself more aggresively (I said nothing about kicking in the nuts). And in these situation theree are a lot of blurred lines. Can you always 100% tell, if a women is interested in you? If whe wants to be kissed? etc.

And some today's women, instead of learning these skills, ie how to deal with unwanted male attention, feel harrassed, feel offended and go to institutions and lawyears for support istead of dealing with it themselves. As an example I have given the waitress who called police because a customer slapped her butt. The customer was a 65-year old man and was there with his wife. There was absolutely no danger there for the waitress. She, instead of mastering the situation, called police


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

Jacck said:


> Women, [blah, blah,blah]


Whereas men have to take no responsibility whatsoever!


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

MacLeod said:


> Whereas men have to take no responsibility whatsoever!


It takes two to tango, so both have responsibility for their mutual relationship. Men have the harder role in dating, they need to have the initiative and they need to lead. Woman just says yes or no.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> you misrepresent me and I stand behind what I have written, but let me clarify.


Actually your position keeps moving. This would be fair enough if you acknowledged it ("oh, sorry - I was wrong") but you seem unaware of it. Still, your stated position is slowly moving towards a more realistic one.



Jacck said:


> And some today's women, instead of learning these skills, ie how to deal with unwanted male attention, feel harrassed, feel offended and go to institutions and lawyears for support istead of dealing with it themselves. As an example I have given the waitress who called police because a customer slapped her butt. The customer was a 65-year old man and was there with his wife. There was absolutely no danger there for the waitress. She, instead of mastering the situation, called police


If I understand you, it is the woman's fault because (a) she is attractive (poor men!); (b) she hasn't learned the social skills needed to get rid of unwanted attention, and (c) because she resorts to the law when an old man sexually assaults her in public. The key point for you appears to be the presence or absence of danger (which I take to mean of physical harm) but it has long been clear in this thread that we are talking about harassment.

On (a) I suggest that it is men who need to get control of themselves in the company of attractive women (male sexual incontinence is not an attractive trait and is "weak" or not "manly"). And I can't imagine what was going through that old man's head to think that a young woman would appreciate his attentions. Or perhaps he realised it would annoy and distress her but thought he would do it anyway? To assert his dominance (as a man and as a customer). And we also need to mention the humiliation of his wife.

On (b) I suggest that you do not know what skills she has learned or what her experience has been to date in using those skills but just suppose you are right. Let's say she is so lacking in social skills that she qualifies as autistic, does that make it OK for men to sexually assault her? Of course not.

On (c) the man broke the law (a law that lags well behind the realities). Why should she not call the police?

Times are changing. Men used to get away with that sort of behaviour and some men think they still have that right. Others bemoan the loss of such privilege and think the world is ruined. But, of course, the more fair world that is slowly emerging will bring happier and more rewarding relationships (of all sorts) between the sexes. Mixing with equals is so much more fun than mixing with deferring subordinates.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Enthusiast said:


> Actually your position keeps moving. This would be fair enough if you acknowledged it ("oh, sorry - I was wrong") but you seem unaware of it. Still, your stated position is slowly moving towards a more realistic one.
> 
> If I understand you, it is the woman's fault because (a) she is attractive (poor men!); (b) she hasn't learned the social skills needed to get rid of unwanted attention, and (c) because she resorts to the law when an old man sexually assaults her in public. The key point for you appears to be the presence or absence of danger (which I take to mean of physical harm) but it has long been clear in this thread that we are talking about harassment.
> 
> ...


1) we alrady discussed the old men. He could be suffering from initial stages of dementia and one of the symptoms of dementia might be sexual desinhibition. Now he will be punished with 2 years in prison
2) the laws/judges/jury etc. which send an old man for 2 years in prison for slapping a waitresses butt are wrong
3) my main problem with this whole harrassment thing seems to be that normal male sexual behavior (making advances on women) seems to be criminalized and punished with punishments disproportionate to the seriousness of the offence and this whole harrassment mania seems to have gone too far in the West, see a discussion what everything is considered harrassment
http://cranstononline.com/stories/wheres-the-line-on-sexual-harassment,131543
4) I am not dismissing serious offences like the sexual harrasment from a superior etc



> Times are changing. Men used to get away with that sort of behaviour and some men think they still have that right. Others bemoan the loss of such privilege and think the world is ruined. But, of course, the more fair world that is slowly emerging will bring happier and more rewarding relationships (of all sorts) between the sexes. Mixing with equals is so much more fun than mixing with deferring subordinates


I am sorry, but my perception is exactly the oposite. The relationships in the society are desintegrating. There are more and more single people, more and more people are unhappy, women and men seem to have lost their role in life and become alienated from each other, from their traditional roles and identities and from their true selves, dating is much harder than it used to be in the past, in part due to the social media revolution. Too many choices, too many entitled people with little responsibility, culture of victimhood and blaming. Just look at statics about marriage or any other thing. There are movements like feminism, the red pill, PUA, MGTOW etc, all hinting at this alienation. The "angry young men", the alt-right are backlashes against this culture. It must be interesting to be a sociologist now. The world, the gender roles is changing like never before. And I am not that optimistic about the future. Too many crises looming at the horizon.


----------



## Guest (Aug 7, 2018)

This thread has nothing to do with music. Isn't there some section of the board where misogyny-related threads are kept?


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

Baron Scarpia said:


> This thread has nothing to do with music. Isn't there some section of the board where misogyny-related threads are kept?


OK, I'll stop with this thread


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Jacck said:


> OK, I'll stop with this thread


I think YOU had better - quit while you are behind. Very wise.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

MacLeod said:


> "It's a huge topic" - but you nevertheless don't have time to read up on it and want to reduce it to a single word characteristic which, on its own, is meaningless. If you want my help with this, you should realise that discrimination only becomes evident in either word or deed. That is to say, any behaviour towards women that is based on discriminatory attitudes (that women are inferior) and should therefore be subject to treatment that reflects that inferiority. I think that includes treating women as sex objects.
> 
> If you're not prepared to engage more comprehensively with the discussion, perhaps you're not really in a postion to make personal declarations about what does and does not constitute sexist behaviour.
> 
> And can we please stop talking repeatedly about a "slap on the bottom" as if it were the single most important form of sexual assault?


 OK - let us admit that the two are both forms of sexism. I am prepared to admit that and did find evidence of it from my brief perusal. I hold my hand up.
However - I dont think in this context it is doing any service to anyone, except those who are perpetrating sexist acts and violence against women, to muddy the waters by claiming that third wave feminism is creating conditions in which men feel that they are the victims of their own inability to grasp what kinds of behavior makes women feel threatened. How can men be blamed for any "transgressions" under these circumstances if one cant even hold open a door for a woman without being reported to HR?

Do you see this point or not?


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

I don’t agree with a lot of what Jacck says -the abuse of women in the workplace and elsewhere has gone on for far too long and now is not the time to be pointing out the exceptions (eg. alleged benign male behavior)- but IMO he has made a few good points and I don’t think anything he has said rises to the point of misogyny (the term may not have been aimed at him, but I mention this just in case it was)- I reserve that term for the most extreme negative attitudes towards women. Fwiw, one has to admire his determined defense -reminds me of Custer’s last stand.


----------



## Radames (Feb 27, 2013)

*Daniele Gatti fired from Royal Concertgebow*

Due to years old allegations - from 1996 and 2000. 
https://www.operanews.com/Opera_New...a_Following_Reports_of_Sexual_Misconduct.html



> AMSTERDAM'S ROYAL CONCERTGEBOUW ORCHESTRA, esteemed as one of the world's most important orchestras, fired its chief conductor Daniele Gatti today following a report published late last month in the Washington Post that the conductor allegedly made unwanted advances towards two sopranos in his dressing rooms during conducting assignments in Chicago and Italy in 1996 and 2000.
> 
> When the Post article was first published on July 26, Gatti issued a statement through a spokesman that read: "All my life I have always been totally alien to any behavior that may be referred to [by] the term harassment, whether psychological or sexual. Every time I have approached someone, I have always done it fully convinced that the interest was mutual. The facts referred to took place a long time ago, but if I have offended anyone, I sincerely apologize."
> 
> ...


----------



## betterthanfine (Oct 17, 2017)

Jacck said:


> It takes two to tango, so both have responsibility for their mutual relationship. Men have the harder role in dating, they need to have the initiative and they need to lead. Woman just says yes or no.


Oh, poor men. They have to do all the work to get these passive women to like them. Come on man, it's not the 19th century. Women ask men out on dates all the time. Besides, you yourself brought up the issue of female aggression towards men. Which is it?

I think this is the problem with most of your statements in this thread, you really have no idea what drives a woman in this day and age. Perhaps take a step back and try to actually comprehend some experiences of the women who have come forward in for instance the Weinstein case. Try to put yourself in their shoes, instead of constantly mansplaining how they should act, or have acted.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

MacLeod said:


> Your tongue may be in your cheek...but I'm pretty sure it doesn't justify your sexism, writ large. What point are you making here?


I am certainly, 100%, certifiably sexist. You are not? (I think you are.) That is one of the bases of human existence, after all.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

EdwardBast said:


> Men make advances on women because it is their nature and every women has to learn how to deal with unwanted advances of men, even the more intrusive ones, it is a basic social skill for women. *I am not advocating harrasment.*
> 
> Let me help your comprehension: The poster who wrote the above was saying it is natural for men to make unwanted advances, which in context included physical assaults such as grabbing and slapping. He was comparing western women of today unfavorably with those of prior generations and other locales for not just slappng the offenders across the face or kicking them in the nuts. The message, in his own words:
> 
> "Men make advances on women because it is their nature … deal with [it]"


Silly me, I took him at his word. But you seem to know his heart and every nuance of understanding this situation that would take paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph after paragraph to explain every single possible scenario and every single possible exception to each scenario to what is harrasment, assault, rape, etc and what is and isn't the proper reaction to said violation.

When he does elaborate he's accused of waffling and being confused on the subject. Are you sure I'm the one who needs help with their comprehension?



Jacck said:


> you misrepresent me and I stand behind what I have written, but let me clarify. Women, especially the attractive ones, get constant attention from men - online, in class, at work, on the street etc. They get offers, they get invited, they get asked for telephone numbers etc. She cannot satisfy all, because it is impossible and maybe she does not want. So she has to learn the skill of how to reject men. Some of these men are tame, ask her politely once and leave her alone. Others can harass her because they cannot take no as a no. Also, there is flirting since puberty, including mutual touching. If the touching makes the woman uncomfortable, she has to learn how to say no. Most women know very well how to reject men and how to show them their boundaries. It is a social skill. If the men is intrusive, she can defend herself more aggresively (I said nothing about kicking in the nuts). And in these situation theree are a lot of blurred lines. Can you always 100% tell, if a women is interested in you? If whe wants to be kissed? etc.
> 
> And some today's women, instead of learning these skills, ie how to deal with unwanted male attention, feel harrassed, feel offended and go to institutions and lawyears for support istead of dealing with it themselves. As an example I have given the waitress who called police because a customer slapped her butt. The customer was a 65-year old man and was there with his wife. There was absolutely no danger there for the waitress. She, instead of mastering the situation, called police


Very well thought out statement, and even though he doesn't come anywhere close to saying it...



MacLeod said:


> Whereas men have to take no responsibility whatsoever!


... someone has to give the hysterical reply. You remind me of the type of person whom upon hearing that someone is pro-life (and not hearing anything else about their views on the subject) will start accusing that person of "advocating illegal back alley abortions." Good Lord man, is everything for you either 0 or 1,000 miles per hour with nothing in between?



stomanek said:


> I think YOU had better - quit while you are behind. Very wise.


I don't think he's behind at all. He has made many valid points, countered a lot of hysteria and overreaction on this thread and kept on going. I guess from the start, I've understood what he's been saying whether he enumerated every single point perfectly or not, and when people took his words, held them under lawyer like scrutiny and retorted with the "Gotcha's," he responded very logically and practically and validated how I read him all along.

I guess I just see a lot of common sense in his posts. But there is nothing common about common sense. We have become a bunch of hysterics in Western Society. Personally, I think there are many grades between grabbing a butt and physically throwing down and holding down a woman while your hands grope all over her body, let alone going anywhere near rape. And I think some of those grades do not warrant police involvement whereas many other's do. But there I go again, using common sense.

I could be wrong, but if it turns out Gatti is a low life, groped women without consent, used his power to take advantage, etc, and got rightly fired and justly punished for it, I'd bet dollars to donuts that Jacck would be pleased with the outcome. Just a hunch.

V


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

*And some today's women, instead of learning these skills, ie how to deal with unwanted male attention, feel harrassed, feel offended and go to institutions and lawyears for support istead of dealing with it themselves.*

Jaack's is not a well thought out statement at all - as the above proves. He is running true to form - putting the onus on women to know how to repel unwanted male attention and implying that if they dont possess these skills they dont have the right to protection. Shifting responsibility away from the perpetrators. He is also generalising about situations he has zero knowledge of. It does not occur to him that young women coming out of conservatoires may not have this life experience.

For decades victims have kept quiet to protect their careers - they have not in fact gone running to the management at the touch of a knee. Those who have suffered abuse have endured. It is only in recent times that some are coming forward - and when one or two talk - others who have suffered invariably speak up - as has happened in this case.

There is absolutely no common sense in Jaack's posts and the fact you think there is simply tells us where you stand on this issue.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

[edited]



stomanek said:


> OK - let us admit that the two are both forms of sexism. I am prepared to admit that and did find evidence of it from my brief perusal. I hold my hand up.


Thank you, stomanek, much appreciated.



stomanek said:


> However - I dont think in this context it is doing any service to anyone, except those who are perpetrating sexist acts and violence against women, to muddy the waters by claiming that third wave feminism is creating conditions in which men feel that they are the victims of their own inability to grasp what kinds of behavior makes women feel threatened. How can men be blamed for any "transgressions" under these circumstances if one cant even hold open a door for a woman without being reported to HR?
> 
> Do you see this point or not?


Well, to be honest, no, I'm not sure I understand it. What I can say on that last point is that just because there is a documented case we can find on the internet of a successful complaint against an employee for holding a door open for a woman, does not mean that now men can't hold doors open without fear of some sort of retribution. If we've been looking at the same case, there was more to it than just door-holding, and we don't know the wider circumstances. We also know that HR don't get everything right. I don't see this is as a big problem (though whether "men should open doors for women" is a different question!)



KenOC said:


> I am certainly, 100%, certifiably sexist. You are not? (I think you are.)


I called you out on a particular thing you said. I'm not accusing you of being sexist, but of an act of sexism. By all means call me out if I exhibit sexist behaviour - I'm pretty sure I have , and will continue to - but I don't believe that makes _me _"sexist" (as in holding conscious attitudes to women that they are inferior and I am entitled to treat them as such).



KenOC said:


> That is one of the bases of human existence, after all.


If you believe that we cannot make progress in changing attitudes - that this is how it will always be - I can see how you might think like that. I think we have, and can continue to make progress, and therefore disagree with your statement.



Varick said:


> ... someone has to give the hysterical reply.


Hysterical? Actually, what I wanted to write was unprintable - Jacck's post was, IMO of course, utter bo110x$ and didn't seem to me to merit a considered reply. What I wrote was the best I could muster.



Varick said:


> You remind me of the type of person [...]


You remind me of the type of person that cannot argue with the post so you attack the poster...

Oh, did I [email protected]!


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

MacLeod, your attitudes are showing. Did you mention stuff like that in that group about your attitudes?


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

shirime said:


> MacLeod, your attitudes are showing. Did you mention stuff like that in that group about your attitudes?


I'm not sure how many of my failings I 'fessed up to - but it's a long list, and I struggle to keep the most abominable hidden.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

MacLeod said:


> I'm not sure how many of my failings I 'fessed up to - but it's a long list, and I struggle to keep the most abominable hidden.


I enjoy your attitudes.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

Btw can we all agree that

if persons _a b c_ and _x_ sez person _y_ dd a mean thing at work and told person _z_ (aka big boss), then person _z_ can assess the situation and decide whether or not to fire person _y_? If persons _a b c_ and _x_'s claims don't stack up, then I guess it would be person _z_ that did wrong.

And can we also agree that calling people out for bad behaviour or sexist remarks ain't a bad thing at all, but just a reminder to look before we leap and a reminder for us to consciously try to improve our understanding of ourselves and the people we interact with? I'm sure I've said some sexist things; the environment that I have grown up in with all of its behavioural expectations _have_ led me to use terms which are indeed rooted in misogyny, even homophobia, despite my intention and despite my actual values regarding sexism (sexism is bad). Call me out if I contradict my values and call me out if there's an opportunity for me to improve myself and how interact with people. In more extreme cases it's evident that there is an extension to what is physically appropriate behaviour, right?

I just want to digress a little, actually to a part of the thread where the idea of romance novels and fantasies came up. The reason I want to do that is because, well, it seems to me the stories we make up (books, plays, opera, ballets, movies etc) influence how we behave towards one another as well. These things are an integral part of culture; they reflect who we are and are products of our creativity and understanding of each other. If anyone is interested in this offshoot of the discussion, I suggest having a look at the YouTube channel Pop Culture Detective who looks primarily at the interactions between characters in famous movies and tv shows. Obviously it's just one guy's opinion, but I want to bring it up because it's something that inspired me to think a little bit more about interactions on screen and in the real world. Here's a video:


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

shirime said:


> Btw can we all agree that
> 
> if persons _a b c_ and _x_ sez person _y_ dd a mean thing at work and told person _z_ (aka big boss), then person _z_ can assess the situation and decide whether or not to fire person _y_? If persons _a b c_ and _x_'s claims don't stack up, then I guess it would be person _z_ that did wrong.


Can't mister boss man fire whoever he wants for whatever reason, unless the person has tenure or something? The boss's situation isn't a moral one I don't think in most cases. The boss could simply fire the person because they're annoyed by all the complaints about them, regardless of whether it's true or not. It's not in an amoral boss's best interest to determine who's right and who's wrong rather than just getting rid of the alleged cause of the things that annoy them, especially if the story is likely to end up cycling in the media.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

Fredx2098 said:


> Can't mister boss man fire whoever he wants for whatever reason, unless the person has tenure or something? The boss's situation isn't a moral one I don't think in most cases. The boss could simply fire the person because they're annoyed by all the complaints about them, regardless of whether it's true or not. It's not in an amoral boss's best interest to determine who's right and who's wrong rather than just getting rid of the alleged cause of the things that annoy them, especially if the story is likely to end up cycling in the media.


This is true, but I sure as heck hope that a boss would have a good reason to fire Gatti, and based on the complaints that women have made it seems like a good enough reason to me.


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Fredx2098 said:


> Can't mister boss man fire whoever he wants for whatever reason, unless the person has tenure or something? The boss's situation isn't a moral one I don't think in most cases. The boss could simply fire the person because they're annoyed by all the complaints about them, regardless of whether it's true or not. It's not in an amoral boss's best interest to determine who's right and who's wrong rather than just getting rid of the alleged cause of the things that annoy them, especially if the story is likely to end up cycling in the media.


Not in much of Europe - at least not for ordinary workers (including managers). The case in question - Gatti's alleged behaviour - would be an offense that could lead to instant dismissal but many offenses would require a more measured approach (a process of warnings etc). Tribunals would blame an employer for sacking someone because their face doesn't fit and would probably award compensation. Contracts for hiring performing artists are probably different, though. But, either way, Gatti's apparent behaviour would not be widely tolerated anywhere these days. I'm not sure how much of his career he will be able to rescue. I'm also not sure now whether I would go to hear him or buy any of his records, either. Certainly, I have not listened to any of Levine's recordings since the revelations about him came out but - do I remember wrongly? - I think he was also convincingly accused of coercion.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

shirime said:


> This is true, but I sure as heck hope that a boss would have a good reason to fire Gatti, and based on the complaints that women have made it seems like a good enough reason to me.


I hope so as well. I would hope that someone in charge of something artistic would have more integrity than the average boss. There are a few different scenarios that I can imagine. There are the people making allegations, then there's Gatti denying them all. One side has to be lying. One scenario could be that the accusers threatened to go to the media, which they seem to have done, and "Gatti Fired After Sexual Harassment Allegations" is a better title than "Sexual Predator Gatti Remains the Conductor of the Orchestra". Either side could still be lying in that scenario. In that case, "He asked me to inform all media that he is extremely surprised and that he firmly denies all sorts of allegations," could be legal jive nonsense slang for "He paid them off so they wouldn't press charges." It's all a messy situation, and I don't know how someone would go about proving sexual harassment. The boss seems to have made the right decision in terms of image, because it's hard or impossible to determine who's lying or not lying, and the boss could have as much knowledge to judge the situation as we do. I prefer for people to be innocent until proven guilty though, but unless he goes to court over this I guess that's irrelevant.


----------



## DeepR (Apr 13, 2012)

His employment contract probably falls under Dutch law. He can't just be fired for any reason. That's why I posted earlier that there should've been some kind of inquiry. People here are making assumptions.



DeepR said:


> One would expect his employer to conduct a thorough inquiry into these allegations. Hearing his side of the story as well. To fire him based on what people say in the media would be wrong. Then you could ruin anyone's career by throwing around random accusations. In this case it appears something did happen considering Gatti's reponse.
> So, if a proper inquiry was held and there were grounds for dismissal then there's not much more to say. If the allegations are false, or do not justify dismissal then it's up to Gatti to try and clear his name in court.


For Dutch members:
https://www.parool.nl/opinie/-aantijging-tegen-daniele-gatti-is-geen-grond-voor-ontslag~a4602590/


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Fredx2098 said:


> I hope so as well. I would hope that someone in charge of something artistic would have more integrity than the average boss. There are a few different scenarios that I can imagine. There are the people making allegations, then there's Gatti denying them all. One side has to be lying. One scenario could be that the accusers threatened to go to the media, which they seem to have done, and "Gatti Fired After Sexual Harassment Allegations" is a better title than "Sexual Predator Gatti Remains the Conductor of the Orchestra". Either side could still be lying in that scenario. In that case, "He asked me to inform all media that he is extremely surprised and that he firmly denies all sorts of allegations," could be legal jive nonsense slang for "He paid them off so they wouldn't press charges." It's all a messy situation, and I don't know how someone would go about proving sexual harassment. The boss seems to have made the right decision in terms of image, because it's hard or impossible to determine who's lying or not lying, and the boss could have as much knowledge to judge the situation as we do. I prefer for people to be innocent until proven guilty though, but unless he goes to court over this I guess that's irrelevant.


As has been pointed out - this is not one isolated case - it appears now that several women have come forward with credible allegations.

This is not a matter of proving guilt. The management have to assess the evidence on the balance of probabilities and it is a matter for them. Not for us armchair pundits.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

stomanek said:


> As has been pointed out - this is not one isolated case - it appears now that several women have come forward with credible allegations.
> 
> This is not a matter of proving guilt. The management have to assess the evidence on the balance of probabilities and it is a matter for them. Not for us armchair pundits.


I have no problem with the decision made to fire him. I don't see what makes the accusations credible though. If enough people gang up on someone, that doesn't mean they're being honest. They could have been conspiring against him for some reason. I also don't know what kind of "evidence" there is or even could be. There's a chance that either side is lying, but the decision made seems to be the right one in a utilitarian way, the easiest one, and the best for their image.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

DeepR said:


> His employment contract probably falls under Dutch law. He can't just be fired for any reason. That's why I posted earlier that there should've been some kind of inquiry. People here are making assumptions.


Just from what I've read about the situation, I think a suspension would be more appropriate. Obviously I would not be an expert on the situation, I'm just speculating.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Fredx2098 said:


> I have no problem with the decision made to fire him. *I don't see what makes the accusations credible though.* If enough people gang up on someone, that doesn't mean they're being honest. They could have been conspiring against him for some reason. I also don't know what kind of "evidence" there is or even could be. There's a chance that either side is lying, but the decision made seems to be the right one in a utilitarian way, the easiest one, and the best for their image.


The fact that many women have come forward with very similar complaints and there would seem to be no motivation for them to fabricate their stories. The possible fact that there may be some 3rd party witness accounts to corroborate?

There are many reasons why the allegations may be credible.

It seems management may have taken the view that the number of allegations and the nature of them are sufficient to conclude that there has been misconduct - or at least - it's not worth risking the reputation of the orch by not taking decisive action. So their belief in the allegations may be irrelevant but they would want to be seen taking appropriate action when there appears to be sufficient evidence of misconduct in the eyes of the public/press.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

stomanek said:


> You haven't seen the detail of the allegations have you - so how would you know?


This is what I'm asking you. I'm not saying that I know they aren't credible, but you said that they are credible.



stomanek said:


> It seems management may have taken the view that the number of allegations and the nature of them are sufficient to conclude that there has been misconduct - or at least - it's not worth risking the reputation of the orch by not taking decisive action. So their belief in the allegations may be irrelevant but they would want to be seen taking appropriate action when there appears to be sufficient evidence of misconduct in the eyes of the public/press.


And yes, I agree with this, like I said.


----------



## Fredx2098 (Jun 24, 2018)

There are plenty of ways that they would be credible, but it's not a certainty.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Fredx2098 said:


> This is what I'm asking you. I'm not saying that I know they aren't credible, but you said that they are credible.
> 
> And yes, I agree with this, like I said.


This is what I said:

*it appears now that several women have come forward with credible allegations. *

So I said "it appears"

I assumed - perhaps wrongly - the fact of him being fired meant that the accusations were credible.

Maybe they're not credible at all - though if that were not - him being fired is an odd thing. I would also expect him to take the orch to court and sue for wrongful dismissal. He has not at this stage said he will do this.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

stomanek said:


> It seems management may have taken the view that the number of allegations and the nature of them are sufficient to conclude that there has been misconduct - or at least - it's not worth risking the reputation of the orch by not taking decisive action. So their belief in the allegations may be irrelevant but they would want to be seen taking appropriate action when there appears to be sufficient evidence of misconduct in the eyes of the public/press.


Or management could have known forever and did nothing until the increasing number of allegations made keeping him on untenable. Really there is no excuse for not knowing; One just has to ask the ladies of the orchestra if one wants to evaluate a conductor's reputation. Word always gets around.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

*In the Washington Post article, soprano Alicia Berneche alleges that in 1996, while she was enrolled in a young artist program at the Lyric Opera of Chicago, Gatti forced himself on her. After inviting her to his dressing room, she says, she found "his hands on my rear end and his tongue down my throat." Another soprano, Jeanne-Michèle Charbonnet, told the paper a similar story about having to push Gatti off of her during a run of Wagner's The Flying Dutchman in Bologna, Italy.*

Press cutting above.

Credible allegations or not. You decide.

I also note that Gatti has shifted his position - initially insisting this is a smear campaign. he has since enlisted a PR Doctor and issued this:

"Today and moving forward, I plan to focus much more on my behaviors and actions with all women. This includes women both young and old, to be sure no woman ever feels uncomfortable ever again, especially women that I work with in my profession in classical music. I am truly sorry."

Who is credible? You decide.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Gatti is not the only one

http://operawire.com/bernard-uzan-announces-resignation-from-opera/

a 60s man through and through.

Modern times just dont suit him.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

Gatti is not credible, that seems clear to me.


----------



## Jacck (Dec 24, 2017)

stomanek said:


> Yes they do - women are increasingly putting themselves forward, when they meet a male they are attracted to. Of course - Jaack probably has not had this experience. I wonder why.


Stomanek, are really arguments such as these necessary? Judging by the reactions of the other gender, I am quite attractive and have always been able to attract the top females. I had to reject some, some were in love with me and I did not reciprocate etc, but in general it is still absolutely true that men do the asking and men lead in relationships (no amount of feminism will change this fact, it is encoded in the brains). It is interesting of what I am being accused of here - misogyny, mansplaining etc. If I observe some of these western women, I am really grateful for the Czech women. Some of them are beautiful, most of them have a nice personality and are still feminine, are not brainwashed by some feminist ideology that has made them masculine and that tells them constantly that men are the enemy to fight and that men are responsible for all their misery. Some western countries have become men-hating and men-disriminating and it is no wonder men go on strike
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ive-new-book-Denigration-Men-PETER-LLOYD.html
I am on the side of all people who suffer, who are downtrodden, discriminated and I am for justice and fair treatment. I have explained countless times why this harrasment mania irritates me - women are authomatically believed and the accused men have no way to defend themselves. I consider the Dutch relatively sensible people and so I tend to believe the accusations against Gatti. I tend to believe the American women less, a lot of them are histrionic or after money. (this is again given by reading about some of the litigation excesses in this country, be it medical malpractice or harrassment). I empathize with all victims of actual abuse who suffer.


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

Jacck said:


> Judging by the reactions of the other gender, I am quite attractive and have always been able to attract the top females.


Yeah man I can tell from your avatar


----------



## Enthusiast (Mar 5, 2016)

Jacck said:


> Some western countries have become men-hating and men-disriminating and it is no wonder men go on strike
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ive-new-book-Denigration-Men-PETER-LLOYD.html


Please please stop reading (or at least stop linking to) the Daily Mail! If you want any credibility for your arguments that is the last source you should quote.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Jacck said:


> Stomanek, are really arguments such as these necessary? Judging by the reactions of the other gender, I am quite attractive and have always been able to attract the top females. I had to reject some, some were in love with me and I did not reciprocate etc, but in general it is still absolutely true that men do the asking and men lead in relationships (no amount of feminism will change this fact, it is encoded in the brains). It is interesting of what I am being accused of here - misogyny, mansplaining etc. If I observe some of these western women, I am really grateful for the Czech women. Some of them are beautiful, most of them have a nice personality and are still feminine, are not brainwashed by some feminist ideology that has made them masculine and that tells them constantly that men are the enemy to fight and that men are responsible for all their misery. Some western countries have become men-hating and men-disriminating and it is no wonder men go on strike
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ive-new-book-Denigration-Men-PETER-LLOYD.html
> I am on the side of all people who suffer, who are downtrodden, discriminated and I am for justice and fair treatment. I have explained countless times why this harrasment mania irritates me - women are authomatically believed and the accused men have no way to defend themselves. I consider the Dutch relatively sensible people and so I tend to believe the accusations against Gatti. I tend to believe the American women less, a lot of them are histrionic or after money. (this is again given by reading about some of the litigation excesses in this country, be it medical malpractice or harrassment). I empathize with all victims of actual abuse who suffer.


I am glad to know you are such a success with women.

As for me I am married - so have some excuses for spending too much time on this forum. As a younger man with your advantages - I think I would probably be doing others things.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

This thread is rapidly descending into the lowest common denominator.


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Enthusiast said:


> Please please stop reading (or at least stop linking to) the Daily Mail! If you want any credibility for your arguments that is the last source you should quote.


Yes my thoughts exactly - I laughed my head off when I read his post. Poor boy - he probably doesn't know - but it's an insight into how he has come to form his views.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

Jacck said:


> Stomanek, are really arguments such as these necessary? Judging by the reactions of the other gender, I am quite attractive and have always been able to attract the top females. I had to reject some, some were in love with me and I did not reciprocate etc, but in general it is still absolutely true that men do the asking and men lead in relationships (no amount of feminism will change this fact, it is encoded in the brains). It is interesting of what I am being accused of here - misogyny, mansplaining etc. If I observe some of these western women, I am really grateful for the Czech women. Some of them are beautiful, most of them have a nice personality and are still feminine, are not brainwashed by some feminist ideology that has made them masculine and that tells them constantly that men are the enemy to fight and that men are responsible for all their misery. Some western countries have become men-hating and men-disriminating and it is no wonder men go on strike
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ive-new-book-Denigration-Men-PETER-LLOYD.html
> I am on the side of all people who suffer, who are downtrodden, discriminated and I am for justice and fair treatment. I have explained countless times why this harrasment mania irritates me - women are authomatically believed and the accused men have no way to defend themselves. I consider the Dutch relatively sensible people and so I tend to believe the accusations against Gatti. I tend to believe the American women less, a lot of them are histrionic or after money. (this is again given by reading about some of the litigation excesses in this country, be it medical malpractice or harrassment). I empathize with all victims of actual abuse who suffer.


I find the above comments loaded with stereotypes. I have no idea why you insist on lumping individuals together into herds.

I did find your "top females" comment amusing. What are the characteristics of a top female?


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> I find the above comments loaded with stereotypes. I have no idea why you insist on lumping individuals together into herds.
> 
> I did find your "top females" comment amusing. What are the characteristics of a top female?


The "top females" comment suggests that females are considered a commodity, which underlies all of the view expressed, it seems to me.

I was told that TC does not permit "controversial" extra-musical discussion. Why does this thread still exist, in the general music section, no less?


----------



## Guest (Aug 8, 2018)

shirime said:


> Btw can we all agree that
> 
> if persons _a b c_ and _x_ sez person _y_ dd a mean thing at work and told person _z_ (aka big boss), then person _z_ can assess the situation and decide whether or not to fire person _y_? If persons _a b c_ and _x_'s claims don't stack up, then I guess it would be person _z_ that did wrong.
> 
> ...


Yes to both questions above. And an interesting video, making a legitimate observation I'd not really noticed before, despite having seen all those movies - and many like them - multiple times. However, it would be too easy to conclude that the "romantic/heroic" role model on offer is expected to be embraced uncritically. If anyone thinks that these films are saying, "Go on boys, go out and get, with coercion if necessary", they are reading the genres wrong, and overstating the impact of role models.



Fredx2098 said:


> Can't mister boss man fire whoever he wants for whatever reason, unless the person has tenure or something? The boss's situation isn't a moral one I don't think in most cases. The boss could simply fire the person because they're annoyed by all the complaints about them, regardless of whether it's true or not. It's not in an amoral boss's best interest to determine who's right and who's wrong rather than just getting rid of the alleged cause of the things that annoy them, especially if the story is likely to end up cycling in the media.


I think we have to work on the assumption that, in ideal circumstances (or "all other things being equal") this is what is supposed to happen. Of course, a crooked or incompetent boss may make the wrong call, but that does not invalidate the point: it's for the manager to investigate and reach a conclusion, taking HR advice to make sure accuser's and accused's employment rights are observed, and referring up the managerial chain where necessary.



Jacck said:


> Some western countries have become men-hating and men-disriminating and it is no wonder men go on strike
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ive-new-book-Denigration-Men-PETER-LLOYD.html


So, one Daily Mail article about one book, and you're hooked on the idea that men are "on strike", and have good reason to go on strike. There are significant inaccuracies in the article (such as references to legislation) which will mislead the reader. The writer of the article has a track record of support for traditional male roles; the writer of the book makes a claim that is unsubstantiated. You can find out more about her and her opinions on Youtube. I wasn't convinced by her performance on Fox News.



stomanek said:


> This post is utter gutter trash and I hope it will be deleted.


It is. Have you reported it?


----------



## PlaySalieri (Jun 3, 2012)

Bulldog said:


> I find the above comments loaded with stereotypes. I have no idea why you insist on lumping individuals together into herds.
> 
> I did find your "top females" comment amusing. What are the characteristics of a top female?


Pity he did not cite his sources earlier - there would now be fewer people with egg on their faces.

"Top Females" Yes - I would love to know or see an example.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

stomanek said:


> "Top Females"  Yes - I would love to know or see an example.


"Mate choice, also known as intersexual selection, is an evolutionary process in which selection is dependent on the attractiveness of an individual's phenotypic traits." (Wiki)

So yes, there are certainly "top females" just as there are "top males". Since tastes vary, either categorization is necessarily a bit vague.

Much more detail regarding human mate choice is available from any study of the mating practices of the Hominidae.


----------



## TurnaboutVox (Sep 22, 2013)

OK. I think we've all had enough 'controversy' in this thread now.

I've decided to close the thread, at least temporarily, until the staff have a chance to review it and make a collective decision about its continuance (or otherwise).


----------

