Table of contents:
In 2017, dozens of allegations of sexual harassment and assaults on young actresses by producer Harvey Weinstein surfaced. These accusations have prompted several celebrities to speak out on a similar issue. After analyzing hundreds of celebrity confessions, scientists have found that all these complaints and confessions belong to women. This prevalence prompted the authors to write articles, which raises the question of why men did not react in any way to such an acute and urgent problem, albeit such a delicate one. Writer and filmmaker Lena Dunham also wrote a research article, which will be discussed in this article.
The content of the article
- 1 Operation of the scope of responsibility
- 2 Silence and its destructive power
- 3 Personal interest
Operation of the Spread of Liability Concepti
Dunham in particular offered her explanations. Among several of her reasons, she names one of the first reasons (in her opinion) why men do not go to the masses with their problem - they do not consider it their problem and their obligation to take care of her. On the other hand, this is due to their natural instincts and psychological factors.
A common phenomenon that occurs precisely in situations where people need help is the concept of spreading responsibility. The main idea behind this concept is as follows. The more people become involved in a particular person's problem, the less likely the victim will be helped. Paradoxically, this is true.
Why is it so, you ask? This is by no means because everyone at close range cannot recognize the problem or because of some unknown accident they cannot do it. It's not even that they are phlegmatic and they don't care. This is because as the group of informed people expands, each person feels less and less personal responsibility for helping. Everyone begins to subconsciously think that others will help a person in need. There is nothing you can do about it - the subtle mechanism of human nature. This does not mean that you are a bad person. The point is the triggering of a certain mechanism of the human psyche.
Spreading responsibility is a powerful social force. Unfortunately, it unreasonably forces you to stay away from the problem, even if a person can help, even if it is about life or death. But there is good news as well. This is not an irresistible force. You can break out of this apathetic mutual responsibility. It is enough just to ask a specific person for help. When others see his actions, another psychological subtlety will be launched - the herd reflex. The rest will follow the example of the first person.
Silence and Its Destructive Power2
If you analyze the Weinstein case, you can draw some conclusions. It all depends on how influential the person with whom the unpleasant situation has happened. For example, if something like this happened to an influential and outstanding person - someone who is really capable of influencing the culture - they may not be afraid and speak out to the whole world. Others are probably afraid of the reaction of society, due to the lack of all-consuming authority, or due to several darkening factors from the biography, which will immediately rush to remember. It is important to understand that while powerful men remain silent, those who have less influence will also stand on the sidelines, and the excesses against women will continue. The herd reflex, remember?
In addition to spreading responsibility, there is another factor - self-interest. According to psychologists and other scientists, a person in any situation subconsciously acts based on his own interests. Few people know that if a person acts out of personal interest, he will end up in a worse position than if he was acting for the good of society.
Returning to the Weinstein case, you can see that the silence of the men in Hollywood is a reflection of their self-interest. After all, a lot of these guys are risking their image or their careers by taking sides. Silence is the key to their stable career and general well-being. But the statements carry certain risks.
A prime example of this is Ben Affleck's tweet on Twitter, where he strongly condemned Weinstein. However, many users began to accuse the artist of hypocrisy, and many of them recalled Affleck's past, where he also behaved inappropriately with women (not in this form, but still). At one point, Affleck's tweet became a real PR disaster. Many Hollywood stars, upon seeing what happened to the innocent recording, will adopt silence as a strategy. Because they do not want to be accused of hypocrisy. As long as silence is still something safe and easy, this is the option most will choose. It is a stick of two ends. If the person does not say anything, they will feel dejected and depressed. If he makes the information public, taking sides, it will be considered PR or hypocrisy. You have to choose the lesser of two evils.For most, this lesser evil is silence.