FRIHOSTFORUMSSEARCHFAQTOSBLOGSCOMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Sexual Harassment





scorpiosemotion
What constitues sexual harassment where you are from. Where does it cross the line? What if any laws protect you from it. Do you think sexual harassment is easy to prosecute. Are guys or girls more effected by it? Why do you think so?

I needed to go back and do a little research on a subject that could become so touchy! Pardon the pun. Wink http://www.de2.psu.edu/harassment/generalinfo/background.html This article gives a great background on sexual harassment and those effected by it. In the article they mention that men and women view sexual harassment differently. How could we not? We are conditioned from childhood boys and girls are raised differently. It is as simple as that. The same considerations that males are taught should be taught to females too. A guy can't hit a girl; I completely agree with that but also think that it should be just as unacceptable for a girl to hit a guy! The Abuse goes two ways here. If you do a google search on case law regarding sexual harassment, it's going to be women suing men for sexual harassment, I for one haven't found a case where a man has sued.
I am all for not letting someone make you a victim, but one does tend to think, is she doing this because... Whatever reason... Maybe I am off base but some of the cases I have read, it seemed to me that the "victims" were doing out of spit for some other reason than they felt "sexually harassed."
Vrythramax
The sexual harrassment laws differ radically from state to state and for from busines to business. For example where I work it would be considered sexual harassment if I even comment on a co-workers attire (ex. thet's a nice jacket, you look good today). The prosecutaion aspect is IMO a much more difficult matter. No offense to any readers out there, but some women like to be complimented on thier attire, hairstyle, or even the way they have thier fingernails done up specially.

It has come to a point in time where sexual harrassment encompasses more than the boss pinching his secretaries butt. In some place I have actually heard of the term "Silent harrassment"...just looking at at someone in an "unacceptable manner". How would one prove a "dirty look" in court? Can it even be proved? At one time all this was considered acceptable behavior, keep in mind that for the most of our history it , we, have lived in a male dominated society. Now that women are receiving the rights they have always deserved many men feel threatened. I know I walk on eggshells when around any of my female co-workers, because as it stands right now my company, and quite possibly the court system, will side with the woman, and unfortunatly this had lead to many abuses....on both sides.

I for one would love to know how the entire topic of sexual harrassment is dealt with in other states and countries. One thing is an absolute fact, this is a debate that will rage on for some time to come.


Congrats to me, this is my 2000th post
Vashni
I never really thought about it that much. I guess there are laws that protect people from it. when does it cross the line? not really sure. i guess it would differ from person to person. but there there are some companies that set the standard for you, so you have to be very careful to know and understand the rules an employee. on a personal basis, just know the laws where you're from.
Insanity
I think it would largely depend on the people you work with. I know that the people at my workplace get away with a lot of sexual harassment because most of it is in good fun like slapping someone on the butt or something. But if the people in your workplace don't share that kind of bond, I suppose it could be a real problem.
Vrythramax
Isn't it rather ironic that a female in the workplace can say " I like your new suit, or your haircut does you justice" and if a male says the same in in a simply complimentary mannor he could be fired from his job and possibly brought up on criminal charges?

Don't get me me wrong, I am all for total eqaulity between the sexes, but why is it socially acceptable for a woman to slap a man in the face (assault) for saying something she doesn't like (or worse kick you someplace I don't even want to think about) and a man is put in jail for doing much less than a physical assualt?

Please don't misunderstand me, I was raised that a man never strikes a woman. But when you look at the averages, women win....if they make a protest, which unfortunatly many don't....and they should.

It certainly seems like a double standard, and that's hardly equality. Is this what the "eqaulity" women were seeking, or is it a form a retroactive revenge for our forefathers misdeeds?
blackheart
In my opinion, harassment of any form is where someone is forced into a situation where they are made to feel uncomfortable.

And some girls do feel uncomfortable being stared at by a man. Is it harassment? Yes. But is it malicious harassment? In most situations, no.
Unless “he” were incessantly staring, or knowingly exhibiting vulgar body language, I don’t think there’s any room for prosecution. Or anything more than a quiet word to stop, at that.

The world has become hyper-sensitive to the way it’s women are treated. It is over the top, and I think there are some women who need to strop grabbing at straws and just go back to common sense.
For more minor “infringements” I’m pretty sure the majority of men would stop what-ever-it-is they’re doing if someone let them know it bothered you.
There are some who wouldn’t, and there are some who would do things with mal-intent. And wether "harassment" is done knowingly or with intent, in my opinion, should be the basis on which prosecution should lie.

Men can’t read minds, and most incidents of sexual harassment are based on mis-communication. Although it is often hard for a woman to tell a man she doesn’t like this or that piece of behaviour, it does seem unfair that a man should then have to be reported for her shyness.

There are obvious things one shouldn’t do. You don’t touch people inappropriately – regardless of their sex. You don’t say sexually oriented or vulgar things to people you don’t know well, or those you don’t have an official “understanding” with that said actions are “okay”. Those in power should not use their power to oblige others into doing things they are not comfortable with. You don’t knowingly and blatantly stare (sometime’s you have to catch yourself out). These are basic moral values.

Of course, everything also works in reverse, it just doesn’t seem to be as common.

(I’ll come back and edit/rewrite/work-on this post in an hour or so – I’m off to have dinner)
saiyeek
Sexual harrassment are the most usual and most devastating problem we are having. It affects ppl's psychology and even their way of behavior. A person sexually harrassed by the ppl of same sex or of opposite, it bothers a lot. In most of the asian countries, one of them in which I live, ppl are too scared or dont feel like expressing that they are sexually harassed. Its the main problem. IN my country, in male dominant society like my country, girls are very much harrassed sexually by the guys. Mostly in schools and colleges, but they feel awkward to react and retailiate. thats the main problem.
scorpiosemotion
Vrythramax wrote:
The sexual harrassment laws differ radically from state to state and for from busines to business. For example where I work it would be considered sexual harassment if I even comment on a co-workers attire (ex. thet's a nice jacket, you look good today). The prosecutaion aspect is IMO a much more difficult matter. No offense to any readers out there, but some women like to be complimented on thier attire, hairstyle, or even the way they have thier fingernails done up specially.

It has come to a point in time where sexual harrassment encompasses more than the boss pinching his secretaries butt. In some place I have actually heard of the term "Silent harrassment"...just looking at at someone in an "unacceptable manner". How would one prove a "dirty look" in court? Can it even be proved? At one time all this was considered acceptable behavior, keep in mind that for the most of our history it , we, have lived in a male dominated society. Now that women are receiving the rights they have always deserved many men feel threatened. I know I walk on eggshells when around any of my female co-workers, because as it stands right now my company, and quite possibly the court system, will side with the woman, and unfortunatly this had lead to many abuses....on both sides.

I for one would love to know how the entire topic of sexual harrassment is dealt with in other states and countries. One thing is an absolute fact, this is a debate that will rage on for some time to come.


Congrats to me, this is my 2000th post



Dancing Congrats Max!!!
The Philosopher Princess
I was asked by a good friend to post my opinion here, so I hope no one minds my barging in to write this up. I am doing it for y’all and for posterity Wink. Since I’m a short-timer, I went ahead and wrote a fair amount on the subject. I hope the length won’t prevent you from reading it. And I hope it helps! Smile
~~~~~~~~~~
I believe it would be an undisputed fact that, given the same potentially harassing words, innuendos, gestures, and/or physical touching (some of those actions which actually might be “harassment” and some which might not), different people will interpret them differently. The same actions will be judged as being very harassing by some people, somewhat harassing by other people, only a little harassing by other people, and not at all harassing by still other people.

Therefore, it would be ludicrous to believe that any laws created and enforced within a monopoly system (e.g., government) that set forth the details of what constitutes so-called sexual harassment and what should be done about “it”, will not work for most people.

Please notice that I didn’t say it won’t work for some people, but that it won’t work for most people -- whether they be the receivers or the bestowers of the actions. Or the people considering it seriously from a philosophical and moral standpoint. Or even those charged with making and enforcing the rules.

When a monopoly attempts to address with laws something that most individuals judge very differently, what you can expect and will most likely get is a patchwork of dysfunctional laws and dysfunctional “justice”, and you don’t even come close to really solving the actual problems. And (no surprises here) that is exactly what we have today, and it’s only getting worse with the more laws that are added.
~~~~~~~~~~
But any initiation of force by a human being upon another human being should be prohibited -- whether such initiation of force fits any particular definition of “sexual harassment” or not.

So, if the inevitably kludgey and ineffectual monopolistic laws are ruled out, how can such force be stopped?

A major portion of the answer is agreements (contracts). In a world of agreements, you end up with competition for the best definitions of sexual harassment. But you need not, and will not, end up with only one definition. Different companies would have different policies on how they define and deal with “sexual harassment”. Potential employees would pick the potential companies that best match their own definitions. Some policies will be “strict”; others less “strict” -- and that’s fine. Some companies would have the same “thou shall not...”s for men as for women, while others would have differences -- and that’s fine. The companies that have “poor” policies (“poor” meaning that people didn’t like them) would not compete for employees as well as the companies with the “better” policies.

It is a fact that women, as a whole, are different from men, as a whole. But it is not a fact that every woman should be treated differently from every man (with regards to both the potentially harassing and potentially harassed positions). Such gender differences are irrelevant to what actual rules (or laws) should be. But they might be very relevant to what companies “should” voluntarily provide as their policies and agreements with their employees. Because, in the same way that companies “should” provide sufficient pay scales to get the kinds of employees that they want, so “should” they provide sufficient sexual harassment and other relevant company policies to get the kinds of employees that they want. (The last 3 “should”s have to do with whether the company will survive or not, and how well they will compete with each other in the free market.)
~~~~~~~~~~
For example, in today’s world of one-size-fits-all “sexual harassment” laws, a company of steam-fitters and pipe layers has to meet the same requirements as a high class charm school or a temporary help secretarial service.

I say that is not only ridiculous but also a big insult to everyone involved. The female pipe layer is likely going to be an extremely tough human being, whereas the male typist maybe won’t be. But my guess on these things is irrelevant, because the companies and employees should set their own standards based on their opinions, and the reality of their situations.

If you ever want to really and truly solve a social problem, do not expect a monopoly to answer your prayers. Instead, only the free market of competition has the best solution.
~~~~~~~~~~
Question about the workplace: Should female supervisors dating male subordinates be treated the same or differently (for example, prohibited or allowed, punished or encouraged) as male supervisors dating female subordinates?

Take 2 people debating this question. If they are debating which (the same or different) treatment of the genders should be added to state law, then both debaters have already lost the debate. But if the 2 are debating whether their own company policy should change, fine! Let them decide their opinion and market it to their management. Or if they are thinking about how it can be dealt with in the private, free world, fine! Let it be addressed in the competition of freedom! Smile

Lawmaking by well-meaning people who don’t comprehend the full effects of the laws they make is one of the reasons for the plethora of asinine laws that cause chaos in the justice system, create criminals out of peaceful people, and make non-crimes into “crimes” -- and it generally backfires to make the situations worse than they were before the “there ought to be a law” crowd got involved.
~~~~~~~~~~
So, to my dear Frihost readers and hopefully upstanding individuals: Do you prefer to pretend to solve real-life problems with simplistic legalistic non-solutions? Or do you want to really solve them? If you want real solutions, then you will not be voting for or otherwise advocating monopolistic laws of interference. Instead you will look to creating free-market contracts and agreements that really work in the real world.
Vrythramax
@ Princess

Thank you. Your post does raise some questions however, the actual leaglity of some measures and the social accetance of some can, and do, vary drastically. In the company I work for, they have clear guidlines about supervisory staff dating subordinates, but in many companies this is not the case. In this one case, I am allowed to look, but not touch. I can', within the confines of the rules of my company, even comment on a woman's dress or I may be subject to dismissal.

Proving harrassment can be extremely difficult in some cases, in others it is clearly evident and easily proved. Where does this line blur? Wken you have people wearing clearly seductive clothing to the workplace, are others not supposed to notice? It seems to me the personal wearing such clothing wishes to be noticed, and possibly complimented on thier attire. This is not saying that they should be pursued, but lets face facts, if you don't want your legs noticed why wear a miniskirt? I have never worn one myself so I can't comment on the comfort level, but I see women having troubles with them (one even made me fall off my chair at work once....no joke).

To digress just a bit, there is most certainly a double standard between the sexes that nonody wants to talk about, or in some cases change. Those who know me know I sing for a rather poular band, and I see 2 or 3 women dancing with each other, closely in some instances, and this is considered socially acceptable...if I were to dance with my bass player we would be beaten near to death (and no, I like the guy, I'm Godfather to his children....but I don't want to dance with him).Another good example is when 2 women meet they often hug each other, no-one takes notice of this, but if 2 men do the same people take notice....sometimes violently.

Everyone(well most everyone) wants equality, so why do people seperate themselves and make equality impossible?
The Philosopher Princess
Vrythramax wrote:
@ Princess

Thank you. Your post does raise some questions however,

Thank you to you too! I would try to answer your questions, however, I don’t really find any. I’m not putting down what you are saying by any means, because it’s all relevant. I just mean that most of your sentences ending in a question mark seem to be either rhetorical or they are already addressed in my essay. The exception I find is the following.

Vrythramax wrote:
Everyone(well most everyone) wants equality, so why do people seperate themselves and make equality impossible?

I challenge your assumption there. I do not believe that it is true that everyone wants equality. I agree that people state this kind of so-called belief often. But it is a specious statement -- meaning that if you found out more details on what people actually believe, you would find out that they either disagree with what it means to want equality, or that they don’t in fact want it.

People don’t really want equality -- they’re looking for a leg up. People claiming to seek equality always want to be equal with those above them, not those below them. People want equality with the executives that make millions, but do not want to be equal to the guy digging cans out of the dumpsters.
~~~~~~~~~~
Like I said, you have some good observations in your thinkings. Can we turn them into actual questions? I will consider this, and maybe you could too. Smile
Vrythramax
@Princess

I was not seeking a question and answer session, nor a debate. I speak my mind and my feelings as I always have, I have never sought to debate any topic with you as I would surely lose. Please don't make me look the fool because I don't word my feelings into questions.
Rico
I don’t get enough sexual harassment at all. How can I get more?
The Philosopher Princess
Vrythramax wrote:
@Princess

I was not seeking a question and answer session, nor a debate. I speak my mind and my feelings as I always have, I have never sought to debate any topic with you as I would surely lose. Please don't make me look the fool because I don't word my feelings into questions.

Okay, but you had said you still have questions. It’s not foolish to have questions. I was hoping to have the challenge of trying to answer some of yours in the area of sexual harassment. I don’t know that I could, so my own question is Would I be able to meet that challenge? That’s why I was hoping to get yours in a form I could work with -- and the invitation is still open.

(Yes, I could speak more on the subject in general but that wouldn’t necessarily be addressing anything helpful to you. It’s a challenge for you {or anyone} to transform their thinkings and feelings into actual questions. I think that’s a very worthy challenge.)
mantasx
I've got no idea what sexual harrasment is U.S, but I go to school and this is what it says :
Quote:

...It is viewed as a form of illegal sex based on descriminatoin. Definition: Sexual Harrasmen shall consist of unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual flavors, and other inappropriate verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature when made by any member of the school staff to a student, when made by member of the school staff to another staff member or when made by any student to another student. ....
Vebal harrasment or abuse;
*Pressure for sexual activity
*Repeated remarks to a person with sexual or demeaning implications;
*Unwelcome touching;
*Suggesting or demanding sexual involvement accompanied by implied or explicit threats concerning grades, job, etc. ....


U.S, NJ, Jackson, CHRISTA McAULIFFE MIDDLE SCHOOL. I've got it from my planner.
Related topics
Do You Know How Tough It Is Being a Man
China Against the Internet
Co - workers Complaint
sms jokes
sms jokes
Arizona Cops Suspended for Sex Toy Prank
Chemical Attacks - by US Forces // Impeach Bush
10frih$ for a crazy fact! (easy money)
Breast Ironing - an African tradition
50 Things to do when one gets a call from TeleMarketting Rep
israeli president could face rape charge
Torture and the US
Woman gets raped, it's her fault?
Islam,Women and The Veil.
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> General Chat

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.