Report comment

There are things to agree with and disagree with here. I am a male middle aged solicitor. I do not agree that it was wrong to attend this ball full stop.
I agree that people should act appropriately and with integrity. I agree that a hostess should be given a non sexualised dress code and not be exclusively female.
I was not in attendance at the function nor were the hundreds of commentators who are providing their hearsay opinions on the men that attended. If you misbehave you will pay the price but we should not have the knifes out for every man that attended, it does not make any sense to me.
Nor do I agree that you can cast a man as a solicitor without marking him with his other roles as a husband, a father, a footy supporter, whatever. Media commentators define us in the singular when we are many things all at once.
We (I hope) all aspire to behaving with integrity and treating others as we expect to be treated. But who can say that they have never let themselves down in one way of another which applies to both men and women? Let he without sin cast the first stone etc.

I am really glad that the #MeToo has generated such a media storm and that behaviours in many aspects of life far beyond the film industry are being forced to reflect and create real change. But as always there is the law of unintended consequences and it does begin to feel that the media is feeding off itself for reasons in many ways unrelated and in addition to the original serious issues.
Wouldn't it be a good thing if the media commentators published and highlighted acts of good deeds and behaviours and provide a fair and balanced commentary?
"A Horse has four legs. A table has four legs. therefore all tables are Horses". if only life were so simple.
It is beginning to feel over egged and all men are by definition badly behaved which is nonsense.