This is unsubstantive. It's one thing to express concern over what you might perceive as encroaching Puritan morality. It's another to blast a movement focused on giving a voice to sexual abuse victims.
Obviously consent is a good thing. But to pretend that the boundaries of what are reasonable regarding consent aren't overstepped and people aren't attacked unfairly is to deny the evidence. This fuzzy and changing boundary creates an environment of fear among men, especially when considering the consequences. There are forums were people discuss these issues in depth. Are they all hallucinating?
I'm on the more progressive end in a coastal city, but have been in a uniquely diverse environment when it comes to political views, international views. People that are more socially liberal tend to have changed their stances because of a change in the general understanding of what is proper or acceptable. People who are more socially conservative have also changes their stances, but specifically blame the fear around #metoo. And I totally understand why they feel this way - it's difficult to place that shift on some nebulous generational change of social mores. It's much easier to place that shift on a specific, well-defined, well-publicized movement. That's not to say anyone is blasting that movement by saying this is how people feel. Neither is it blaming the movement for actually doing anything. However, it is likely what this change is mentally attributed to for many people.
Everyone makes mistakes. But consent is not revokable the next day. To claim abuse later, and not take responsibility, is absurd and offensive to real victims.
But this is how it is until women can take responsibility and say clearly "no" or accept the consequences of saying "yes" and possibly regretting it later.
You mean the part where consent wasn't given in the first place? Here's the original article:
https://babe.net/2018/01/13/aziz-ansari-28355
“I wasn’t really even thinking of that, I didn’t want to be engaged in that with him. But he kept asking, so I said, ‘Next time.’ And he goes, ‘Oh, you mean second date?’ and I go, ‘Oh, yeah, sure,’ and he goes, ‘Well, if I poured you another glass of wine now, would it count as our second date?’”
That said, other parts of the babe.net article do paint a much worse picture, of physically escalating both inappropriately (e.g. repeatedly putting her hand on his dick) and bizarrely (what's up with that fingers in mouth thing she described?)
Sure, but it's a very unambiguous example of her communicating lack of consent. One of many, yes. The Pixar debacle is even more clear cut IMO — don't insist on touching your subordinates.