For people like Franken, we should allow a reset and "evolving"

[ecstatic]

Remember how we allowed people to "evolve" on the gay marriage issue? Can't we do the same for specific types of harassment?

I'm not referring to the Moore, Trump, Weinstein, or even Lauer forms of assault and harassment, but the ambiguous incidents like what Franken has been accused of.

The fact is, social norms were different 10 and 20 years ago. If we continue the zero tolerance approach for behavior that may or may not have occurred during a different era, I think a lot of people (mostly men) will go down in flames.

If we don't make distinctions and inject more common sense into the discussion, I fear a backlash that will set women back decades.

[brooklynite]

1. You probably could have...

...if it was one incident and he accepted responsibility and profusely apologized.

That's not how this situation played out.

[Kirk Lover]

2. We're going to have to because of the quantity of men involved. It's going to crash the economy

will all these peeps out of a job.

[Jan Levinson]

3. I think it depends...

Based on the evidence we have now, I am disappointed Franken resigned, but if WaPost is really working on a new article about sexual harassment and Congress, for all we know there could be more to the story. Although I think the story was unfairly blown up by conservative media, which lead to democratic outcry, for all we know Franken resigned because there could be more we don’t even know about.

The bottom line is that on college campuses one in every four females is assaulted. This statistic tells me that a good percentage of men have engaged in sexual misconduct in some sort of fashion; therefore, realistically, there probably are forgivable areas. What type of acts are forgiveable, I don’t know yet. It’s defintitely a conversation worth having.

[loyalsister]

4. Policy positions and personal behavior are very different

There is no way to put an end to electing people who have not yet evolved if the system that protects them remains in place. Remembering Anita Hill... did men from both parties protect Clarence Thomas because they knew they had an ass grab in their past? Probably at least a few. In which case they would have deferred to the system they knew protected them all.
We have been waiting for a long time for a system to evolve that no longer confirms, protects, and elects sexual predators. Franken's rejection of it is a step in that direction.