The ongoing #MeToo movement needs no introduction as the campaign has been diffused all over the world. No denying the fact that every movement has its positive and negative aspects right after the beginning and the end. However, in between the good and bad parts of the issue, people have started being opinionated with some odd references, comparisons, and counterparts, which certainly debilitates the fidelity of the #MeToo movement.
No violation of anyone’s fundamental right of expression or freedom of speech but it’s equally a morality of everyone not to hamper a movement initiated to fight against a social issue; especially when you have no direct or indirect affinity to the issue. It’s quite concerning that people’s half-baked pedagogy is killing the seriousness of the issue. The two major references that are being widespread to counter the movement are widely irrational. One, why the victims took so many years to speak up? Two, most of the accusations are an attempt to malign someone or to grab attention or malafide information.
Let’s unfold the depth of the references before fiercely reaching any judgment. Needless to say, everyone has different upbringing, psychology, and state of mind. So are women. Sometimes it’s tough to discover the inadmissible act as sexual harassment for her because she wasn’t aware or mature enough back in times. Or maybe it was done by someone she was close enough for friendship or relationship but ‘not close’ for physical relationship or intercourse. Sometimes she felt that she herself is the reason behind being attacked or harassed and it shouldn’t be surprising that she didn’t take any immediate action in the past because the psychology says, you won’t be comfortable or free to admit the stigma in which you have participated.
Sometimes the circumstances do not allow her to project herself as a victim. Back then, she might have fear of losing her image, reputation, job, family or relationships. Probably, she won’t have courage or access to speak up. Or maybe the harasser would have some control or power over her. So again, it shouldn’t be questionable that why she took action in a favorable situation or when she has been overcome it.
Moreover, if any movement has been revolutionized, it’s obvious to join and rebel by the victim, no matters how much or less the degree of harassment was or whether she is affected or not at the present. Certainly, the chances of reaching the matter to authorities were slim in the past as compared to the present. Then, why she is being questioned over the time taken to speak up?
Coming to the second major counterpart of the issue, no denying that the movement is corrupted up to some extent but the ambiguity of the accusations or claims must be cleared by the law and order, no debate how good or bad. A close door case shouldn’t be mooted by public or media trial. Also, if the seriousness of the issue gets weaken, the genuine survival would definitely suffer and there would be no point of the rationalism of the movement.