Thanks for the clarification. Looks like two victims. What a frigging mess.
That's what's being reported. In fact she has been to the police to file a complaint as well.
What I read was the accuser denied she made the complaint and her signature is a forgery. Not that the fraudulent claim was a purposeful false claim from the woman but the actual claim wasn't real. Is that incorrect?
Men can and are also sexually harassed in the workplace. Maybe only hire robots.There is definitely a much needed sea change going on regarding the treatment of women in the workplace, but unfortunately with pendulum swings it has a habit of swinging too far and unforeseen consequences tend to pop up. No doubt HR departments are reanalyzing how they treat sexual harassment and that's a good thing, but I've already heard talk of things like shaking hands being lumped into unprovoked physical contact, having a three foot halo around them that you aren't allowed to breach uninvited, and other absurd things.
Not sure if those examples are legit or not but I'm sure policies will be enacted to protect the company (or gov agency) from liabilities and those policies don't always make sense. Look what happened in schools with zero tolerance rules and such, in an effort to protect against lawsuits common sense tends to go out the window.
Given this newfound fear of liabilities surrounding it what do you think (if any) are the downsides for women? I can see companies shying away from hiring women - not officially, some other reason will be found not to hire - out of fear of sexual harassment lawsuits. Especially in smaller companies whomever is doing the hiring might think it's best to just not hire a woman rather than risk it. And will when there is blow back over all of this - and there will be - will that just work to undermine legitimate complaints?
Yep, a woman can wear a wet tee shirt that says fuck me and then can allege unwanted sexual comments are being made. Silly really.Thought this was interesting
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/13/marcy-kaptur-womens-clothing-sexual-harassment-294974
A female Democratic House member shocked fellow lawmakers Wednesday when she said that the revealing clothing that some members and staffers wear is an “invitation” to sexual harassment.
Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) made the comments during a private Democratic Caucus meeting Wednesday to discuss sexual harassment issues, according to two Democratic sources in the room.
“I saw a member yesterday with her cleavage so deep it was down to the floor,” Kaptur said, according to the sources present. “And what I’ve seen … it's really an invitation.” The comments left many others in the room stunned, the sources said.
Even if they came to work butt naked that doesn’t mean grab them, but I’ve worked with women that would come to work with really low cut shirts and yeah it’s definitely distracting. It’s almost impossible to go sit and have conversations without glancing since they’re out there for the world to see. I find it unprofessional to wear stuff like that, same if a guy had his shirt unbuttoned to show off his chest.
Yep, a woman can wear a wet tee shirt that says fuck me and then can allege unwanted sexual comments are being made. Silly really.
I am curious.I've never faulted anyone for the attention they give me or comments they make to me when I choose to wear something revealing but BUT it is NEVER and invitation to touch me in any way. I either wear revealing clothing FOR attention OR when I played in a pool league, a distraction. Worked beautifully at times but most of the time I played serious players that were only distracted between shots. ... regardless, I looked damn fine. With that said, it's truly disturbing some of the things men will allow to come out of their mouths. Being a funny girl though, I almost always get one up on 'em so, level playing field I guess. (*Vulgarity isn't my thing no matter how vulgar some men can be but I absolutely can be inappropriate enough to top 'em or stop 'em. My female friends benefit from having me around as well.) Any way, yes most women wearing revealing clothing do want attention they just don't want it to be creepy/scary and they want to feel safe. I've never been able to figure out why some men think revealing clothing is an unspoken permission to make a woman feel threatened and unsafe. It's certainly not attractive (that's true for almost all women). In fact it's gag inducing.
I disagree. A man knows when he's being creepy. The room in this debate that you're looking for is how shallow a woman is. Some will think a man creepy because she doesn't find him physically/personally attractive (that's the subjective part). Rules are the same though, she shuts you down, leave her be. Correct?I agree saying they want attention but not creepy attention is very subjective.
You should provide the counter-example here, because as it stands, men don't use their sexuality as a source of power, they use power as a conduit to sexuality.I am curious.
So when a woman using sexuality as a source of power, as is the case of your pool hall distraction scenario, that is empowering.
When a man uses sexuality as a source of power, that is a criminal offense.
Seems like the attention versus creeper distinction is rather subjective.
That is an interesting distinction.You should provide the counter-example here, because as it stands, men don't use their sexuality as a source of power, they use power as a conduit to sexuality.
I disagree. A man knows when he's being creepy. The room in this debate that you're looking for is how shallow a woman is. Some will think a man creepy because she doesn't find him physically/personally attractive (that's the subjective part). Rules are the same though, she shuts you down, leave her be. Correct?
I still maintain men know when they're being creepy. How they feel about being creepy varies.
Getting away with it is different from knowing you're being creepy. Be mad at the model for being good looking. Ya know, if ya just have to be mad at someone.Two different men can deliver the same line, and can be creepy while the other not. This is part of the problem.
A male model who drives a Ferrari can get away with a lot more than a balding dead beat dad with a beer gut.
As a woman that hasn't been my experience. Men interacting with me or watching them interact with females around me. For the most part they (men) seem to be aware and either don't care or they're putting on a show regardless the size of his audience. I will admit I have on occasion come up against a few men fully unaware that they are being creepy. For example, my stalker thought he was being sexy as all get out (he was a minister in the military and no, I did nothing to get him in trouble)I don't think that's true, at least not much of the time. People aren't always good at being aware of how their actions are recived, of how they look from a perspective seriously different from their own.
Of course one can absolutely argue that ignorance is not an excuse, or that people shouldn't be let off simply becuase they've failed to educate themselves or because they've been mislead due to a history of being allowed to get away with things they shouldn't have been.
But power leads to ignorance - people with too much power can be damaged by it, it undermines the capacity for empathy.
At some point someone like Harvey Weinstein could have been stopped before he became a monster. He must have gotten that way by degrees, surely?
As a woman that hasn't been my experience. Men interacting with me or watching them interact with females around me. For the most part they (men) seem to be aware and either don't care or they putting on a show regardless the size of his audience. I will admit I have on occasion come up against a ft fully unaware that he is being creepy. For example, my stalker thought he was being sexy as all get out (he was a minister in the military and no, I did nothing to get him in trouble)
We'll have a meeting of minds on this.Ach, I had some thoughts on the matter, but thinking about it, I'm not at all confident they hold up in competition with someone's direct experience. But perhaps there is more than one phenomenon going under the same label?
An awful lot of the time it might be deliberate aggression, but seems to me sometimes guys just don't have much grasp of how things appear from the other party's perspective, and if they could somehow magically be forced to see it from that p.o.v they'd be embarrassed into changing their behaviour.
Thought this was interesting
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/13/marcy-kaptur-womens-clothing-sexual-harassment-294974
A female Democratic House member shocked fellow lawmakers Wednesday when she said that the revealing clothing that some members and staffers wear is an “invitation” to sexual harassment.
Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio) made the comments during a private Democratic Caucus meeting Wednesday to discuss sexual harassment issues, according to two Democratic sources in the room.
“I saw a member yesterday with her cleavage so deep it was down to the floor,” Kaptur said, according to the sources present. “And what I’ve seen … it's really an invitation.” The comments left many others in the room stunned, the sources said.
Even if they came to work butt naked that doesn’t mean grab them, but I’ve worked with women that would come to work with really low cut shirts and yeah it’s definitely distracting. It’s almost impossible to go sit and have conversations without glancing since they’re out there for the world to see. I find it unprofessional to wear stuff like that, same if a guy had his shirt unbuttoned to show off his chest.
Allow me to help you understand his point. First, I'll need you to remove most of your frontal lobes. Be especially sure you get all the prefrontal cortex. You'll also need to make sure you have plenty of clearance around your knees, for unobstructed jerking. Finally, I'll need you to restrict your news intake to the Daily Show and Samantha Bee. Then you can let the understanding flow in.That is what you took away from his post? Honest question here, can you point out where he was saying white men are being oppressed? I would assume that you just threw that out there because he feels there are negatives and you assume anyone not thinking the current situation is all good is a white nationalist.
Yup. And this too will work out okay. It'll just be messy along the way, because humans are involved.I don't know, civil rights went okay vs what we had before.
I don't care for Franken and I've always considered him to be a creep, but he'd have been an idiot to leave until he saw that Moore was defeated. Both Moore and Franken deny everything, but Moore's admitted conduct (which he admittedly walked back last week) was much creepier. Had he won, and been seated (and I very much doubt that McConnell et al have the conviction of their words, much less the actual legal authority to deny him), then Franken would have been a fool to have stepped down.He hasn't left the Senate. Where is the proof? I've heard only he-said, she-said and he denies all of it.
Agreed, in principle. But in the case we just had, there was no time for a trial even had the statutes of limitations not expired, or had there been one iota of evidence. I'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, but such accusations, even forty years late, do deserve at least some thought before empowering the accused. As to the Congressmen who have resigned, that was their own choice; they could also have fought the accusations.But false report only hurt the real victim, I mean They got punished before due process, and we just expected to believe every report without checking the validity. All of this will create apathy.
If the real sexual harassment occurred just tell authority, but never judge or punish people without trials, it's sickening me seeing people life destroyed just because he was accused and before being proven guilty.