Television talk show host Dr. Phil (McGraw) has come under fire for a tweet he posted Tuesday on Twitter. The tweet said, "If a girl is drunk, is it OK to have sex with her? Reply yes or no to @drphill #teenaccused"
This has resulted in a Change.org petition going around, which has already resulted in over 800 signatures. It's also resulted in some angry responses before the tweet was finally removed. Here are a few examples of these very responses:
- "Dr Oz was saving lives today and Dr. Phil is trying to hook up with drunk girls where is @oprah she needs to have an emergency team meeting"
- "If Dr. Phil is drunk is it okay for him to tweet?"
- "If a person is a misogynist, is it OK to just refer to him as 'Dr. Phil' from now on? #DrPhilQuestions"
Now, it's ridiculous to think that Dr. Phil was "trying to hook up with drunk girls," as one responder claims, since the talk show host was likely just trying to garner people's feelings on the matter in the run-up to a show discussing that very topic. However, the question was worded in such a manner that it came across as insensitive - almost making light of the subject. This, I think more than anything else, is what I and many others found offensive about it.
"If a girl is drunk, is it OK to have sex with her? Reply yes or no to @drphil #teenaccused"
The question would have been more acceptable if it had been reworded to something like this - "When drinking alcohol, at what point would you feel it was wrong to have sex with a girl? Are there any occasions where you wouldn't feel wrong having sex with a girl who happened to be drunk? What situations would these be?"
Of course, since Twitter is limited to 140 characters per tweet, the before-mentioned question could be separated into three parts. It would allow for more variety of opinion, wouldn't make light of the subject, and wouldn't treat the matter as a black-and-white issue. That's another problem with the original question. It's extremely difficult to answer such a poorly worded question, void of nuance, on a sensitive topic with a simple yes or no.
If one member of a sexually-active couple gets drunk and wants to engage in intercourse, is it wrong to do so then? When both parties are drunk, is it wrong? If so, is it wrong on just the guy's behalf or both parties' part? Like I said, it's a more nuanced issue than I think the tweet depicted.
If Dr. Phil wasn't referring to sexually-active couples or a situation where both parties were drunk, and was asking the question, "If a girl is drunk, is it OK for a sober guy she's not involved with to have sex with her?," then the answer would be a resounding no. But due to how poorly worded the question was, I'll likely never know if Dr. Phil was speaking in general terms or with regard to a more specific situation. In any case, he was right to take the tweet down, owes the Twitter community and women in general an apology, and should think about matters more carefully before posting a tweet on such a sensitive subject.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/20/dr-phil-sexual-assault-tweet_n_3787984.html
This has resulted in a Change.org petition going around, which has already resulted in over 800 signatures. It's also resulted in some angry responses before the tweet was finally removed. Here are a few examples of these very responses:
- "Dr Oz was saving lives today and Dr. Phil is trying to hook up with drunk girls where is @oprah she needs to have an emergency team meeting"
- "If Dr. Phil is drunk is it okay for him to tweet?"
- "If a person is a misogynist, is it OK to just refer to him as 'Dr. Phil' from now on? #DrPhilQuestions"
Now, it's ridiculous to think that Dr. Phil was "trying to hook up with drunk girls," as one responder claims, since the talk show host was likely just trying to garner people's feelings on the matter in the run-up to a show discussing that very topic. However, the question was worded in such a manner that it came across as insensitive - almost making light of the subject. This, I think more than anything else, is what I and many others found offensive about it.
"If a girl is drunk, is it OK to have sex with her? Reply yes or no to @drphil #teenaccused"
The question would have been more acceptable if it had been reworded to something like this - "When drinking alcohol, at what point would you feel it was wrong to have sex with a girl? Are there any occasions where you wouldn't feel wrong having sex with a girl who happened to be drunk? What situations would these be?"
Of course, since Twitter is limited to 140 characters per tweet, the before-mentioned question could be separated into three parts. It would allow for more variety of opinion, wouldn't make light of the subject, and wouldn't treat the matter as a black-and-white issue. That's another problem with the original question. It's extremely difficult to answer such a poorly worded question, void of nuance, on a sensitive topic with a simple yes or no.
If one member of a sexually-active couple gets drunk and wants to engage in intercourse, is it wrong to do so then? When both parties are drunk, is it wrong? If so, is it wrong on just the guy's behalf or both parties' part? Like I said, it's a more nuanced issue than I think the tweet depicted.
If Dr. Phil wasn't referring to sexually-active couples or a situation where both parties were drunk, and was asking the question, "If a girl is drunk, is it OK for a sober guy she's not involved with to have sex with her?," then the answer would be a resounding no. But due to how poorly worded the question was, I'll likely never know if Dr. Phil was speaking in general terms or with regard to a more specific situation. In any case, he was right to take the tweet down, owes the Twitter community and women in general an apology, and should think about matters more carefully before posting a tweet on such a sensitive subject.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/20/dr-phil-sexual-assault-tweet_n_3787984.html
Comments
Post a Comment