1. Can men be redeemed for their actions and are all actions commited by men the same?
  2. There is a difference between the different actions men commit, and some actions are worse than others. Matt Damon says, “There’s a difference between, you know, patting someone on the butt and rape or child molestation, right? Both of those behaviors need to be confronted and eradicated without question, but they shouldn’t be conflated, right?”. Bret Stephens says, “A murderer is worse than a thief. A drug dealer is worse than a user. And so on. Gillibrand, Driver and others want to blur such distinctions, on the theory that we need a zero-tolerance approach. That may sound admirable, but it’s legally unworkable and, in many cases, simply unjust.” as well as “Does this behavior really merit professional decapitation? Wouldn’t the apology, plus, say, a monthlong suspension, have sufficed? Don’t we have the moral capacity to distinguish between aggressive sexual predation and run-of-the-mill romantic bungling — between a pattern of abusive behavior and a good man’s uncharacteristic bad moments? And do companies really have the resources, or the right, to police and adjudicate the private behavior of their employees?”
  3. I do agree with the claim that not all of the sexual crimes that men are equal, but that does not excuse any of them and they should still be punished, but the punishment between an inappropriate comment and rape should not be the same, with rape being a much worse crime.