In the beginning - news. After the collective exit of Hollywood women in mourning on the "Golden Globe" in protest against harassment, it's time to design a social movement. One of the participants in the action Oprah Winfrey gathered the asset (including "blonde in law" Reese Witherspoon and "Queen Amidala" Natalie Portman) and put the question squarely.
Namely - how the movement "Time Out" (formerly "Me too") will help victims of harassment, especially women, outside the entertainment industry: "How will we help this campaign in a woman's office, on a farm, in a factory?" Asked Winfrey.
And, according to the US media, there is still no clear answer from the women of show business. Well, apart from the obvious and toothless "we are attracting public attention to the problem."
Why Oprah raised the question of the future - it is understandable. Multibillionaires with a difficult childhood (she was also raped, and still at 13-year-old, relatives) is now seriously considered as one of the likely candidates for the presidency of the United States in 2020. From the Democrats, of course. Therefore, it is important for her to understand how to convert the current Hollywood gulp into a nationwide movement that would encompass all segments of American society. That on the wave (if all comes together) to enter the White House.
White House building in Washington, DC, USA
In the future, the movement will, of course, become international: on this account, there are many mechanisms - from the ideological processing of the mass consciousness of the earthmen by the same American agitprop and to the usual imitation in the societies of other countries.
But in this sense we are interested in something else. The notorious harassment - that is, harassment - has the widest meaning in the advanced countries. It is not only the sudden grasping of colleagues and acquaintances for different places, or an invitation to a sauna in response to a request for promotion, or getting an esemask. This is also "unwanted sexual suggestions and other verbal or physical behavior of a sexual nature that directly or indirectly affect human activities, unreasonably interfere or create an intimidating, hostile or insulting atmosphere."
As is easy to see, this formulation in fact gives the very "object of action" to decide where they are simply courting, and where already harassment. Harassment, in particular, "Dustin Hoffman invited me to a party in a narrow circle, and then threw him home." And when we were driving in the back seat, he suddenly (!) Put his hand on my chest and I froze in horror ".
Harassment is, by the way, even the recognition of Ellen Page, now an open lesbian, in the fact that the director of "X-Men" Brett Ratner once on set called on another actress to "have sex with her so Ellen finally realized that she was lesbian." Ratner's crime in this case is that he publicly pronounced the actress Paige homosexual even years before she herself took this important and joyful step in her life.
Directed by Brett Ratner
And so on.
In fact, it is (in particular) that proactive masculine behavior in the broadest spectrum of manifestations is henceforth an act of risk - as it can be interpreted by a woman as criminal.
What is the trouble? The presence of countless incidents, during which men persistently offer women (well, men, too, for that matter), the program "sex in exchange for a career," is beyond question. Suffice it to recall the infernal creature of Larry Nasser, a long-time physician of the American gymnastics team, who for years exchanged sex with young athletes for the possibility of their participation in competitions (now, by the way, he started serving an 60-year sentence - but not for this, but for keeping child porn ).
Moreover, who has never heard of attempts by slightly mildly attractive males to use their position to achieve sex, let him raise his hand.
However, relying on criminal incidents, a hastily arisen political activist in the US launched a civil campaign mechanism that threatens to gasp not only by sex predators, but also by instinctive human behavior in general.
Because the masculine initiative itself is prescribed in the basic algorithms of a person's sexual behavior. Regardless of whether I am talking about Iceland or about the settlement of Australian Aborigines, a man shows signs of attention to a beautiful woman.
And, attention, the question: how will he do this, knowing that his compliments and invitations to dancing can suddenly turn out to be filed in the case of sexual harassment?
If we understand anything in something, it will result in another wave of tightening the rules of public behavior - on the street, at work, on the Internet and then on the list.
Up to the point that women, as a first step, will be offered to sign a contract saying that, for example, they "agree to take the first-level courtships listed in appendix no. 2". It looks like a dense pelevin, but at least there is at least a super-popular literary prototype of future relations, namely, the epic contract that Anastacia signed before plunging into the abyss of unbridled passion with a clearly defined framework with billionaire Gray.
Men (and companies that do not want to pay compensation), of course, will be defended as they can. In particular - the tightening of the dress code, in which women are simply forbidden (and in many places they are already banned) to be beautiful and decorated. No long nails with bright lacquer, no makeup, hairstyle - ponytail, clothing, hiding forms. No smiles and jokes. No sexually provocative (that is, just coquettish) behavior.
Almost during the development of the trend, the only legitimate place for acquaintances will be the corresponding licensed sites that are delegated the rights to mate the inhabitants of advanced countries. And the mass culture, right up to its shady part - the porn industry, will undergo violent changes. From the eternal subjects will be excluded "The teacher in glasses shows an unshaven senior pupil how it's done" and "The boss shows the secretary how to achieve a position." The folkloric character "Bald of the Brazzers" may begin to read before, during and after each plot of the speech about gender equality and the inadmissibility of repeating such scenarios in life. Etc.
If this is not all anti-utopia, then I'm Papa Carlo. But the trick is that this anti-utopia has non-zero chances to be realized in the most open and free society.
And here it is worth speculating on why it is America that can become the pioneer in this campaign on basic human instincts.
I have a version.
For about a couple of hundred years, the main features of the conditional "American model" were the competition and initiative. In the defense of healthy American predation, even such unexpected characters as Nikolai Alekseevich Nekrasov ("His God (an American - author's note) - a dollar extracted by work, and not a stolen dollar!") Appeared. Competitiveness, initiative, the desire for championships and domination in a certain sense created the American power of the end of the XX century.
Against this background, the "lifhakas" of the unsuccessful in the purely capitalist sense, but also of the initiative layers, could not develop. The battle for equal opportunities was adopted by a long list of "suppressed groups", which began - quite in the American spirit - to gnaw out opportunities for themselves. And the list of these "angry victims" is being replenished continuously.
The secret of success was simple: first, declare yourself an oppressed part of society, then raise high and, finally, achieve quotas and benefits.
As a result, there is a paradox. Realizing the "competitive" attitudes, these groups of activists are destroying the very idea of free competition from within, which at one time made America (along with a host of favorable external circumstances) America great.
And the results are obvious.
The thing is that the social organism is a much more complicated thing than even launching a manned spacecraft.
And here is the fact for comparison. The country, 50 years ago, who planted people on the Moon (we are not currently considering the version of the "Moon Conspiracy"), has not been able to simply go into space for the eighth year already. There are reasons to believe that over the past decades a kind of "unwritten culture" of manned ships production has been lost (up to the culture of locksmith John, who knows how to properly grind the part number 91234). At the same time, the country that survived almost a collapse, but did not lose its culture, on the other end of the Atlantic, calmly continued launching people into orbit.
What destroyed the American culture of "production of astronautics" - one can only guess. It is possible that the advent of some effective management.
But something similar can happen with the very culture of production of the "victorious American" as such. To do this, it is enough that the champions of life there are not the most useful (with all their minuses) becoming en masse, but those most in line with the requirements of the new ideology.
As a country that is experiencing such an internal "hunt for champions", will restore its already partially lost world leadership - a rhetorical question.