Sexual Harrassment - what is it and what isn't it?

[BlackSand]

Lol, it is not the mind that is the problem, it is the gonads, dear. The 'nads help the men fight, but also help to cause problems as well.
To 'fix' this, you have to 'fix' the men, get it?
Or are you one of those people who think the sexes are the same?

Okay ... Let's roll with that assertion.
Since you are suggesting that men cannot function properly under adverse conditions and remain combat ready ... Let them sit on the bench.

A woman can go into a mission and remain focused on the objective, training, combat skills and proper unit function.
She isn't going to lose her mind and unnecessarily put her fellow soldiers at risk to save a man just because he has a dick.

If a man cannot cut it ... Make his sorry horny ass take a knee.

.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Of course. The situations evercurious was throwing out were general, not about the workplace.

Alright. Just making sure.

 

[danielpalos]

I am heterosexual. I refuse to consider sexual advances by women, harassment in modern times.

I simply need to improve my communication skills.

 

[OldLady]

Plus one woman who feels rather similarly to Alexandra here.

I'm a dom type, though a slight deviant from the norm in that I'm not into betas (men or women) but rather fellow alphas. I guess I've been relatively lucky in that all my "mistaken" hits were on fellow alphas who took my misread of their interest as a compliment rather than as "sexual assault."

Still I lodge a complaint, not for myself as I'm "off the market," but rather for other women and men like me who prefer an alpha "male" approach when it comes to sex, and relationships. If a guy has to ask for "permission" they ain't gonna get my go ahead...

It's gotten so ridiculous out there these days that my husband and I had a discussion with our family lawyer about how our boys can protect themselves from false accusations. There is almost no way short of a signed "sexual consent approval" form - and damn straight the woman better be sober and be willing to say she /was/ sober 40 years down the line.

The hysteria around this is absolutely out of control and I don't see anyway to rein it in... It's so out there that a guy can't hit on a girl at school, can't do it at work, and shit even on this board a woman yesterday complained about guys hitting on her in a fucking bar. There is /no where/ a guy can hit on a girl, not even a god damn fishing compliment to see if she's interested in them. Lawyer up men, you're gonna need it just to get a fucking date >.<

Please link me to any of the actual accusations against men that we've heard about that were a simple compliment.
What's wrong with "would you like to go for a (drink) (coffee) (dinner)?"

It's not a compliment or testing the waters to send an employee a sex toy with instructions how to use it. Or slamming your groin up against a woman in the elevator. That is not a smooth way to ask about a date.
Keep the accusations in context. There have always been polite ways for a man to show interest in a woman, and they are not suddenly verboten. This argument that it is destroying any potential relationships between men and women is a scare tactic to convince people we shouldn't be holding these harassers accountable.

There's been COURT rulings about this shit honey, where have you been?

Here's the latest one I can recall from Canada - note the first case cited, the woman /sued/ over getting canned, and cited a simple compliment as harassment.

EDIT - Hell note them all, that's actually a pretty nice write up of cases from up north. I'll see if I can find some American ones though.

I think your link got lost?

 

[EverCurious]

Plus one woman who feels rather similarly to Alexandra here.

I'm a dom type, though a slight deviant from the norm in that I'm not into betas (men or women) but rather fellow alphas. I guess I've been relatively lucky in that all my "mistaken" hits were on fellow alphas who took my misread of their interest as a compliment rather than as "sexual assault."

Still I lodge a complaint, not for myself as I'm "off the market," but rather for other women and men like me who prefer an alpha "male" approach when it comes to sex, and relationships. If a guy has to ask for "permission" they ain't gonna get my go ahead...

It's gotten so ridiculous out there these days that my husband and I had a discussion with our family lawyer about how our boys can protect themselves from false accusations. There is almost no way short of a signed "sexual consent approval" form - and damn straight the woman better be sober and be willing to say she /was/ sober 40 years down the line.

The hysteria around this is absolutely out of control and I don't see anyway to rein it in... It's so out there that a guy can't hit on a girl at school, can't do it at work, and shit even on this board a woman yesterday complained about guys hitting on her in a fucking bar. There is /no where/ a guy can hit on a girl, not even a god damn fishing compliment to see if she's interested in them. Lawyer up men, you're gonna need it just to get a fucking date >.<

Please link me to any of the actual accusations against men that we've heard about that were a simple compliment.
What's wrong with "would you like to go for a (drink) (coffee) (dinner)?"

It's not a compliment or testing the waters to send an employee a sex toy with instructions how to use it. Or slamming your groin up against a woman in the elevator. That is not a smooth way to ask about a date.
Keep the accusations in context. There have always been polite ways for a man to show interest in a woman, and they are not suddenly verboten. This argument that it is destroying any potential relationships between men and women is a scare tactic to convince people we shouldn't be holding these harassers accountable.

There's been COURT rulings about this shit honey, where have you been?

Here's the latest one I can recall from Canada - note the first case cited, the woman /sued/ over getting canned, and cited a simple compliment as harassment.

EDIT - Hell note them all, that's actually a pretty nice write up of cases from up north. I'll see if I can find some American ones though.

I think your link got lost?

noooz it was a good one and I can't see the top of the page now to get the linky again >.<

Bah, at least I can see the linky for this one - Compliment or Sexual Harassment: Where do you Draw the Line? – Slaw

First case there, they had to rule on if it's a compliment vs sexual harassment - note also the legal oped that follows that case (a la repeated compliments = sexual harassment) That particular case stems from 2011... This whole "compliments are harassment" thing has been going on in the third-wave feminist movement for like a decade.

US businesses actually have to carry insurance for this shit because the gov says the business is liable if their supervisor does this shit - aka they're gonna pay through the nose because "they hired the dick [who dared compliment a woman and make her uncomfortable]" (this was a well intentioned attempt to make a "difference" because we've been working with "discrimination" [including sexual harassment stuff] for 30 years, but the training shit the gov required businesses [with over 50 employees I believe] to do wasn't making any difference in the reported incidents. There's a special entity, both fed {EECO} and state {erm... PPC I think is their acro.} who looks into this (and other 'discrimination' violations, Title VII)

See also this study that just came out (I call a bit of hysteria on the results, but it is what it is) - https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/11/daily-chart-14?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/

"Stunningly, over 1/3 of those polled ranging in age from 18-30 (male and female) said a man “commenting on attractiveness” would “always” or “usually” be a form of sexual harassment."

 

[Natural Citizen]

We've reached a rather dangerous tipping point...and I don't know where it will go or how we should handle it.

What do you mean by we? Why the collectivization? Is there a reason? There's an underlying tenor in your choice of dialogue that could be a little disturbing absent clarification. Particularly the latter part of your sentence here.

 

[danielpalos]

I have worked around women my entire career and have NEVER been accused of harassing a woman or using my authority over them to finagle sexual favors. Those being accused have proof against them. "He said, she said" doesn't work not even in the admiralty courts. Accusations can be made against anyone but the burden of proof is on the plaintiff and the defendant gets the opportunity to confront/ face off against his/her accusers.

And exactly when has that occurred over the last couple months? I don't recall any of these fellows facing their accusers in a court of law yet.

But they've already been convicted in the court of public opinion. Lauer got fired and will always be a scuzz. Franken will probably be fired by voters during his next election, and he'll never live down that picture. Charlie Rose went from lion to leper.

If a woman who's worked with you decided to level an accusation, and enough people paid attention, the same could happen to you whether you deserved it or not.

There is nothing more disgusting than a woman hating woman who sucks cocks every chance she gets, desperate for attention and approval from men. You’re pathetic.

What if she claims she wants to practice because practice makes perfect?

 

[SYTFE]

It's not a new problem. I was coming of age in the late 80's, early 90's, and PC culture was already well-established when it came to sexual harassment. The Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings were the first manifestation of it.

I was just a high school kid working an evening job as a restaurant hostess back then, but I'll always remember one night in the break area when one of the prep cooks complimented my hairstyle. Even though I thanked him earnestly (I had worked on it, after all), his face quickly took on a haunted aspect, reflecting his inner thoughts. Then he looked at me cautiously and said he was sorry that he spoke without thinking, and that he didn't mean to make me uncomfortable if he had, indeed, done that.

I was horrified. For him. This poor guy, just another kid my age, had paid me a compliment, and then an instant later had been seized by dreadful visions of the manager firing him for making unwanted advances on a female co-worker.

That was the incident that made me realize I could no longer call myself a feminist - at least, not a feminist by contemporary standards. From its seat in the metropolitan bastions of social influence, the womens' movement wasn't promoting equality, it was threatening persecution and instilling fear... a very well-founded fear. If I'd had the mind to, I could have complained in melodramatic fashion about that boy's compliment and watched as he was fired.

It reminded me of The Crucible.

Something was really wrong.

And it still is. What's new is that it's coming back to haunt the left. They were fine with it up until now.

Your made up story was very entertaining. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Aries]

why don’t women “belong” in the military? Do they also not belong in the workplace? Or out in public without a male relative escort?

Women belong in the military but not in combat roles or mixed with the men. We should go back to have separate corps for men and women.

The only way this does NOT make sense is if someone does not understand the difference between men and women.

There are also differences between different women and different men. Taking different people and training them to work together as a team is the point.

 

[Aries]

Gender is a social construct.

That's just nuts.

A social construction, or social construct or a social concept is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society which exists solely because people agree to behave as if it exists, or agree to follow certain conventional rules.

social construct. - Bing

Exactly. Gender is a social construct. Society tells us that girls cry and boys don’t. Society tells us that boys like blue and girls like pink. Society tells us that boys play with trucks and girls play with barbies. Society tells us that boys are rough and girls are gentle.

Reality tells us that it is all bullshit. That there are boys who cry and girls who fight. There are boys who dance and girls who play hockey. There are boys that wear makeup and girls that work on cars.

As a little girl I liked blue, played in mud puddles, and grew up to be a college basketball player. As someone who has always broken gender norms, I can assure you, it’s a social construct.

 

[Aries]

Absolutely I agree- I put the current stuff in three categories:
a) Sexual assault- that includes of course the obvious- rape- but also includes taking a 14 year old's hand and putting it on your johnson.
b) Sexual intimidation- that is usually a power thing- using your power or authority to try to coerce or intimidate someone to have sex.
c) Sexual harrassment- that includes pursuing a woman when she does not want to be pursued- but also includes commenting about her boobs.

Grabbing her buns or forcing an unwanted kiss might apply to any of the three- but I agree not the same as rape- or sexually abusing a minor.

There is a difference- a big difference.

Grabbing a woman's ass or kissing a woman you don't know, or who has not agreed to be touched is assault (or, battery, I don't know the correct terminology), and it should be reported to authorities as such. No one has a right to put a hand on you without your consent.

Witnesses have heard President trump brag about kissing women in this way. And he is on tape talking about having done much worse. I take him at his word, and believe him. I think he's a sexual predator.

Donald Trump told us that he is a sexual predator and the gop told him that was fine by them.

 

[EverCurious]

Gender is a social construct.

That's just nuts.

A social construction, or social construct or a social concept is an invention or artifact of a particular culture or society which exists solely because people agree to behave as if it exists, or agree to follow certain conventional rules.

social construct. - Bing

Exactly. Gender is a social construct. Society tells us that girls cry and boys don’t. Society tells us that boys like blue and girls like pink. Society tells us that boys play with trucks and girls play with barbies. Society tells us that boys are rough and girls are gentle.

Reality tells us that it is all bullshit. That there are boys who cry and girls who fight. There are boys who dance and girls who play hockey. There are boys that wear makeup and girls that work on cars.

As a little girl I liked blue, played in mud puddles, and grew up to be a college basketball player. As someone who has always broken gender norms, I can assure you, it’s a social construct.

I actually agree with you, Aries, on this I too was a huge tom boy when I was a kid and I've always had a bit of a "male identity." There is no doubt in my mind that the classical gender role ideals are a product of Christianity; it's rather to be expected considering that like 90% of "traditional American values" are rooted in the teachings of the bible. Not to say we can't buck that system, but where I will [possibly] diverge [as I do not know where you stand on the following Aries], and clarify my agreement to the idea is at the aspect of expecting everyone to conform to the feminist individuals opinions.

Social construct is a two way street...

Just as feminists and gender norm breakers argue it is "unfair" to be put into a role of X merely by ones birth gender, it is also unfair to /punish/ folks for discussing issues within the context of their /own/ social construct upbringing; that is to say, as an example, when I started working corporate and some men were raised, and truly believed, that I was simply too soft and emotional to do the job. I was able to understand things from /their/ perspective and /their/ upbringing - [to recognize that they had concerns for the success of the business, for their own careers - and frankly I cannot blame them for that; upper management can absolutely /destroy/ a business no matter how great the product is - and let us not forget the very valid fears that are touched upon by the OPs topic - fear of saying the wrong thing, offending the wrong woman, and getting fired or sued over it.] Because I understood the idea of "social construct" (the term didn't really exist back then, but the general idea certainly did,) I was also comprehend the nuances of some guy's reactions/interactions toward/with me without turning it into "they hate women" or "they want women barefoot in the kitchen" and "subservient to men" (and frankly folks who spout this latter catch-phrase about "traditional" American men have /clearly/ never met/seen a happily married husband and wife.) Those "assumed thoughts" are NOT typically what is being thought, more typically it is a... base emotional reaction to an... esoteric threat; and some people, (and I'd say perhaps especially men who have a family reliant upon their paycheck,) react to such perceived threats with some measure of verbal aggression, be that trying to get the woman to quit or lobbying against it as a hiring policy, or whatever.

That "verbally aggressive" reaction is actually no different than what happens in same sex worker conflict interactions. Negative fear mongering of feminists and "victim status pimps" that attempts to alter that particular /normal/ dynamic into an "evil" or a "war on women." That is to say, it is not always sexism or patriarchy that drives men to object to women working. And similarly, it is not usually sexism that drives men's objections to things like women going out to bars or "not having a man." This is the deceptive "twisting" that folks do when they're pushing an agenda, to gain support via sympathy, when more often than not the base reason that men object to the latter two is because they are both socially and biologically trained/engineered/designed to protect women. When one get wrapped up in an "agenda" - well meaning as it might be - they very often overlook reasonable explanations and grasp onto the worst possible scenario because it validates or supports their position (aka confirmation bias.)

Its like me, I'm a woman so my opinion counts on this shit too, but too often when I attempt discuss my opinion on the negatives of the women's movement I am labeled sexist. (I won't get into the details of my reasons for being "anti-feminist" because it's not really related to the topic at hand, nor particularly my response and opinion on this particular OT sidetrack. It'll have to suffice for me to say that I do not believe women are incapable, but rather more along the lines of, just because you /can/ doesn't mean you /should/.)


To bring this OT side-line back on point with the OP here, I would suggest that in the arena of "sexual harassment" there is also a shit ton of "twisting" happening along with the accompanying "misunderstanding" when it comes to shit like compliments, sexual jokes and innuendo, and other "harmless" items that are being taken out of context in the quest to "pimp an agenda."

There are obviously things that cross the line; to example one of the court cases in the link I'd put up for ChrisL; a supervisor telling a female employee they'd like to do them doggy style on the desk is quite obviously way, way over the line. I also think that there is room for improvement here; I can easily see, and support, getting rid of sexual jokes and innuendo in the workplace (most places have honestly,) but just as employers usually have a handbook to explain the rules for employee behavior at work, there also needs to be a kind of "social" handbook on what is and is not acceptable behavior - it is not fair to decide after the fact that simply asking a girl out for a drink is sexual harassment, that hitting on a girl is sexual harassment, that putting a hand on a woman's shoulder is sexual assault, when /all/ of those things have traditionally been completely acceptable behavior.

I mean despite being uhm "aggressive" in my pickup methods back in the day [just grabbing them and "making a move",] and I can certainly see how someone could find that "scary" (even if I didn't intend it that way) so I'm more than willing to uhm... "de-normalize" that as "acceptable" or uhm agree to call it "sexual assault" I guess, (not to say I think us alpha aggressive folks have to stop coming on that to those who similarly enjoy it, but rather we need to have a bit more uh... discussion... no... idk something prior to acting somehow... I'm not sure what nor how yet.) I mean honestly, as a mother of four boys, I am not apposed to having a fucking legal document that has to be signed before they can touch or kiss, much less make out or have sex, but I also kind of see how that might be a bit unrealistic and perhaps me being biased to protecting my children from getting sued over a misread of interest and fucking their lives over - many jobs won't hire someone with any kind of assault/harassment on their record (even a restraining order) because the businesses are held liable for anything their manager/supervisors do wrong. (Which I'll go OT again to point out is yet another reason that managers and CEOs make so much more money than your average pleb)

 

[danielpalos]

I don't believe in sexual harassment for heterosexuals, only relationship harassment.

 

[Pogo]

Ran across this the other day and thought of this thread.

Watch what Danny deVito does here at about 23:10 ---

​

Of course, to find out what sets it up you'll need to watch the entire story for the context.

I suspect that just as "in war truth is the first casualty", in this burgeoning sexual harassment issue context is the first casualty. These dynamics are complex and can't be left-brained down to simple dry statistics.

Of course, what deVito's character above is doing is an act of power in a social hierarchy, not an act of sexual harassment. In fact this entire episode is dripping with social power trips, and the scene cited is simply the last one.

 

[danielpalos]

I really can handle uncommitted safe sex. Women are welcome to verify that whenever it is convenient for both of us.