Any trial lawyer can tell you about the vagaries of memory. And although first hand witness accounts are generally considered best evidence, they are often unreliable, particularly in the “he said/she said” situation. It’s why abuse and sexual assault allegations – particularly of a historic nature – are so hard to unravel.

Thank you for this piece. I was in the audience at the Sydney Writers Festival when Zinzi (though at the time, an unidentified young woman) first challenged Junot Diaz. And as an audience member who knew nothing of the situation, I have to say he responded very graciously. I told a friend about the incident after the next session, and speculated something would come out soon on Twitter to elucidate. And as we know now, it did.

I’ve been following these allegations with some curiosity and scepticism but, with that trial lawyer’s brain, have found them vague and strangely lacking in substance. Like you, I wondered what “forcible kissing” meant. I was bemused by the description of “a wide-eyed 26 year old” (ie. grown woman, with her own agency?), and I wondered when being a bit frustrated and shouty in a heated debate had become another #MeToo allegation. I’m not justifying the behaviour of Mr Diaz, if he overstepped the line – I just didn’t think the reported incidents were sufficient to warrant public shaming and job loss. And yes, I know about men behaving badly – I’m a Gen X feminist who has worked as a lawyer for twenty-five years, in particularly fraught and boysy areas of the law, and if aggressive tone of voice is enough to warrant a complaint, I’ve seen, heard and experienced more than enough bad behaviour from men – and women – than I’d care to list. And yes, it’s unpleasant and stressful to be on the receiving end. And no, I don’t think we should condone bullying in the workplace (though it definitely happens!). But I don’t think that alone constitutes misogyny, just because a woman’s involved. More often than not, it says something about the shouter’s inability to temper their own emotions in a stressful situation, and shouldn’t be taken personally (hard though that may be).

So, once again, thanks for shedding some further light on this situation, and voicing some of the things I’ve been thinking, but hadn’t yet put down to paper. Again, after too many years in the law, I’m kind of resigned to the fact that we often never get to the truth of a situation – again, because individual perceptions can be so skewed. But, based only on the three allegations you’ve mentioned above, and so far nothing more, at least in the public arena, I’d wondered if Mr Diaz deserved the full wrath of #MeToo to fall on his head, without listening to his side of the story. And to construe his confessional piece in the New Yorker as a “pre-emptive strike” shows a distinctive lack of empathy for men who have also been abused – but that’s another story.