Sorry Lyle, I believe it is that easy.
The psychologist who wrote the article posted on Psychology Today that I linked has a
different viewpoint based on her expertise in the field.
Regarding Senator Franken, maybe he wouldn't be in this mess now if he had kept his hands to himself. These women were women he had no intimate relationship with, and had no right to touch without their permission. Look at the picture where he's pretending to squeeze the sleeping woman's breasts. He says he was being "funny". Why didn't he use his fingers to put a pair of horns on her head? Why didn't he pretend to be picking her nose? Why not just pose next to her and make a face or pretend to be asleep?
Nope, he went right for the breasts.
Sen. Franken's case is a lot different than the other ones we've heard about. Besides the woman above, the other women all accused him of touching them when they were having photo opportunities. Being a person who likes to find humor in any situation, I have crossed a line on an occasion or two when I've said something I shouldn't have or an action I might have thought twice about, but in the moment you think it's going to make people laugh and be amusing. So, I am willing to give a professional comedian some leeway when they get in trouble for saying or doing something they might not have if they'd run it by a committee first.
Since I am gay and been around gay men a lot, I have also noticed over the years that straight women will often fool around with gay men to the point of joking about their breasts and to the point of gay men touching these women's breasts (without permission) and the women not batting an eye about it. It's not sexual to them, I guess, because it's gay men. I remember one time when a straight co-worker I was with remarked on this situation wondering if he pretended to be gay if he could do the same thing.
I have to say it's a bit uncomfortable to write about these things because one doesn't know how someone else will interpret what you've written or if you are actually getting a point across that you're trying to make. These days you never know what someone will take offense to, and there's opportunities galore to take offense at most anything if one wants to focus on those things.
All I know is that the past couple of months of men being accused of various charges often seems like a witch hunt, at times seems wholly shocking and inappropriate, seems like no big deal in some instances, seems like some women are presenting themselves as weak and fragile for what appears rather minor, seems like some women being very courageous and honorable about their experiences, "fifteen minutes of fame" in other cases. In other words, all over the map.
It's also somewhat disturbing to see that the people being accused are almost immediately being erased. In Kevin Spacey's case, literally being erased and replaced from the upcoming film All the Money in the World. I am a person who has enjoyed his professional work, but also found his inclination to remain closeted in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, problematic. I have watched Charlie Rose's nightly program, depending on the guests, for over twenty years. I have thought Al Franken a fine Senator. I think Garrison Keillor is getting a raw deal. I think the accusation against George Takei is very suspect. I think it's also horrific that in cases like Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes, that they lose their jobs, but are given multi-millions of dollars when they leave.
It's easier to let go those you don't care for, like those two I just mentioned or Roy Moore and Trump, but infuriating that their supporters give those two a pass and actually think the women who've come forward are liars involved in plots to discredit them. That's just wrongheaded ignorance. No one seems to care about the allegations about George H.W. Bush, either, relegating his actions to seem like a grandfather being naughty.
As for Angela Lansbury, I agree with the criticism. Just because a woman dresses in a way that others may view as sexy, doesn't mean she's given permission to anyone to touch her or make inappropriate comments to her.
When you write "that others may view as sexy" -- that's "in the eye of the beholder" territory again. It's a correct concept, but are women who dress that way so naive in the way men behave around them? It also takes any responsibility away from a woman who dresses provocatively. It's not hard to see that men who are aroused by sexy images and video of women online, in magazines, strip clubs or Las Vegas shows or any other media, don't react the same way to women in every day settings. It also seems to me that men think women are sexy regardless of what they're wearing...a low cut gown or a flight suit and helmet. It also doesn't mean that there aren't women who do dress that way precisely to get attention, or whatever they're after, from men.
My friend told me the story of working on a film in another state where the woman he was working with (and someone he'd known in this type of work and liked) in the set decoration area, was using her feminine wiles, as a man would put it, to "get things done" with the local men who were assisting. One day something happened, which my friend never actually found out what it was, but it was very inappropriate. The woman immediately dealt with the situation and it was "handled". The point is that some women do use this in ways that, in this case, at least one man took as an invitation to cross an inappropriate line.
I am not condoning inappropriate or bad behavior. I'm saying, like the title of that Nancy Meyer's movie, "It's Complicated."