Can I be a feminist and 'one of the guys'?

[Datepalm]

1) Ok... it is that bad even pre-translation. Hope you at least managed to share a word with the poor girl, this sounds like drive-one-into-suicide harassment.

2) Well, I had to give a brief biology lesson. And yes, it inconveniences me to be presumed guilty and having to prove my innocence. Giving someone the right to be oversensitive means the whole "innocent till proven guilty" thing Democracy is built on just goes flying out the window. Also, sexual harassment seems to be the only crime that is classified as such according to the identity of the offender (As in "Eu..that guy is creepy, but I wouldn't mind so much if it was that cute guy doing it"), which grates on my sense of justice.

3) So... just wellfare state and civil rights for all, or re-distributed wealth and "all men must shed their national differences"?

1. thats what drove me crazy - she (the girl) and her friends were clearly annoyed and rolling their eyes and saying how immature guys are, etc, but not complaining to the teacher, threatening to sue the entire frigging education system for sexual harrassment and calling the media. (at one point one girl explained that its becuase they like the girl being sung at. So its sort of ok. Endearing really.) It seemed like they were pretty used to hearing that level of language. (I'd never heard it before the army, btw, and i'm only about 5-6 years older than the kids. I can't figure out whats changed in that time. It isn't like I didn't grow up with MTV or whatever is being blamed these days.)

2. presumed guilty of what? of making a comment someone found offensive? She did find it offensive. Incorrectly so, and you explained yourself. It happens all the time without having overtones of sexual harrassment and is not quite the death of democracy. But plenty of genuinely harmful, offensive comments are brushed off all the time. I don't know about your specific experiences, but I think as a society we're a long way yet from the pendulum swinging too far.

3. Both, duh.

Thanks for all the fish - When I talked to my boss he immediately said "you're absoloutely right" and that he'd talk to the guy and that i'd never go on another trip with him. We don't have an office, and theres no "work enviroment", practically speaking. This was the frist time i'd been anywhere overnight with this particular guy and even without intervention it could even be months before I ever run into him again. We have an extremely high turnover rate, to put it mildly. It wouldn't particularly surprise me if this is the first time anyone has ever complained. (And its not entirely impossible that no one has ever had cause to complain before, though I doubt it.) We'll see how it develops.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

I am saying we are trying to do too much to combat sexual harassment and we should cut back and not allow unfounded claims of sexual harassment to be made and thus fewer innocent men should be made to squirm quite a bit in a lot of instances.

If this were true, we wouldn't still have a huge problem with it.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

I am saying we are trying to do too much to combat sexual harassment and we should cut back and not allow unfounded claims of sexual harassment to be made and thus fewer innocent men should be made to squirm quite a bit in a lot of instances.

I ... have no words. Or none that won't get me banned. Yes, the real victims of sexual harrassment are the innocent men, not the recipients (male and female and neither) of the harrassment. Of course. How could we all be so silly.

[Samalander]

I thought you were called in to explain? How is that being presumed guilty? If you were presumed guilty, why would they bother talking to you about it?

Being asked to defend yourself != 'prove your innocence'.

In any other sort of crime, one "doesn't get asked to defend oneself" until the prosecution has evidence sufficient for conviction. Then they still have to prove it.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

In any other sort of crime, one "doesn't get asked to defend oneself" until the prosecution has evidence sufficient for conviction. Then they still have to prove it.

That's simply not true, or people would never be found innocent once things went to court.

[Samalander]

I ... have no words. Or none that won't get me banned. Yes, the real victims of sexual harrassment are the innocent men, not the recipients (male and female and neither) of the harrassment. Of course. How could we all be so silly.

But being an innocent men, it matters to me how the rules and enforcement of such things go. As it should to all of you.

[mormont]

I am saying we are trying to do too much to combat sexual harassment and we should cut back and not allow unfounded claims of sexual harassment to be made and thus fewer innocent men should be made to squirm quite a bit in a lot of instances.

Wait. You've discovered a way to prevent people making unfounded claims?

This could seriously revolutionise not just criminal justice, but society itself. A method by which nobody can ever be accused of something they didn't do!

Disappointingly, you forgot to mention how it works, exactly. Could you explain further?

[thx4allthefish]

Thanks for all the fish - When I talked to my boss he immediately said "you're absoloutely right" and that he'd talk to the guy and that i'd never go on another trip with him. We don't have an office, and theres no "work enviroment", practically speaking. This was the frist time i'd been anywhere overnight with this particular guy and even without intervention it could even be months before I ever run into him again. We have an extremely high turnover rate, to put it mildly. It wouldn't particularly surprise me if this is the first time anyone has ever complained. (And its not entirely impossible that no one has ever had cause to complain before, though I doubt it.) We'll see how it develops.

Be careful, though. If he does not stand in for his words, consider leaving. you have only one life. and it's too short to spend on such quabbles.

[Paddy]

2) Well, I had to give a brief biology lesson. And yes, it inconveniences me to be presumed guilty and having to prove my innocence. Giving someone the right to be oversensitive means the whole "innocent till proven guilty" thing Democracy is built on just goes flying out the window. Also, sexual harassment seems to be the only crime that is classified as such according to the identity of the offender (As in "Eu..that guy is creepy, but I wouldn't mind so much if it was that cute guy doing it"), which grates on my sense of justice.

Sounds like it was a fair comment for a biology lesson, the complainer was just wrong.

You are falling into the common misunderstanding of the concept of presumption of innocence. Presumption of innocence is a legal right of a defendant in criminal trials in many, but not all modern countries. I don't think it has that much to do with the foundations of Democracy.

It has nothing to do with how individuals treat each other in work or societal context.

I've forgotten the exact figures, but I'm sure someone in thread can help me.

But, my sense of justice is irked by the fact that the number of women who've suffered sexual assault is so high that it's beyond absurd.

[Datepalm]

On the other hand, in modern hebrew slang "vaginish" when spoken about a woman means "hot"/"sexy/"beautiful" and is an accepted term for all but the old/language fanatics/rabid feminists. With a slight change to the masculine it can also apply to a man.

Are we going to wage war on language now?

You really want to go there? fine.

עזוב אני לא אתחיל על מה הבעייתיות ב"כוסית" כי זה כבר באמת מושרש (מה שלא מבטל את הבעייתיות אבל הופך את זה בלתקוף תחנות רוח כשבאמת יש ענקים באזור)

המילה הייתה "פות", ומדי פעם גם "כוס" (שזו עדיין מילה גסה בכל צורה בעברית, ובכלל איננה על משקל "כוסית" מבחינת רמת שימוש)

And yes, if its relevant, we will absoloutely wage a war on language now.

I also have no idea how thats relevant to your statement that the pendulum has gone too far.

[MinDonner]

Online translation says:

I will not forget what the problems in "inflammatory" because it really is rooted (which eliminates the problem but turns it from attacking wind stations when you really have giants in the region)

The word was "cunt", and occasionally "Cup" (this is still a dirty word in any form in Hebrew, not including the weight of "glass" in terms of level of use)"

[Paddy]

I am saying we are trying to do too much to combat sexual harassment and we should cut back and not allow unfounded claims of sexual harassment to be made and thus fewer innocent men should be made to squirm quite a bit in a lot of instances.

Quite a lot? Do you have any figures? Do you think that more people are targets of unfounded claims than are victims of sexual assault?

Do you think that both things are roughly equivalent so that if the numbers of each were roughly the same it would be balanced out?

Do you not think that the, frankly stunning, prevalence of sexual assault and rape is something that causes many orders of magnitude more harm than a few people suffering from unfounded claims, the vast majority of which I expect would be dismissed rather promptly?

[Xray the Enforcer]

Awwww damn, I love when Datepalm fires up the battleaxe. :pirate:

[MinDonner]

...and yet another feminism thread goes back to discussing the guys, whose problems are so much more important. Yes, false accusations are a problem; no, that is not the point of this thread. Go start your own one if you really want to.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

It's about 1 in 3, on a worldwide scale. http://www.woar.org/resources/sexual-assault-statistics.html

[The Wolf Maid]

I am saying we are trying to do too much to combat sexual harassment and we should cut back and not allow unfounded claims of sexual harassment to be made and thus fewer innocent men should be made to squirm quite a bit in a lot of instances.

YES. ABSOLUTELY. Because cutting back on measures to combat sexual harassment will somehow lessen it. Think of the poor innocent men squirming. Never mind the fact that it's still a prevalent practice in many workplaces (and that not all victims are women, but they are the huge majority of it) and that much of its is unreported and wasn't acted on.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Well, let's look at this logically.

If nobody reports any sexual harrassment / sexual assault, the incidence rate will drop to 0. At least, that'll be the official figure, which is really all that matters. Ergo, the problem will be solved! No more sexual crimes!

[Noontidal]

Well, let's look at this logically.

If nobody reports any sexual harrassment / sexual assault, the incidence rate will drop to 0. At least, that'll be the official figure, which is really all that matters. Ergo, the problem will be solved! No more sexual crimes!

2...

3. Profit!

[Xray the Enforcer]

Regarding "respect" vs. "wants to bed" -- I think that's a false dichotomy, in that men are perfectly capable of respecting someone even while they are sleeping with them. I wouldn't be married to Mr. X if he didn't respect me, and I'd dump him on his ass in an attosecond if he stopped respecting me. (love you, hon!) In fact, I don't bed people who don't respect me. I don't bed (or even bother being friends with) people I suspect would lose respect for me if I bedded them. Life is too short to hang out with atavistic shitheads.

That said -- because our culture is so fucked up and sexist, as a woman I do have to be more assertive. The key there is to adopt the proper mindset: don't wait for other people to confer respect to you. Fuck that. Make them earn your respect. :)

[KAH]

In any other sort of crime, one "doesn't get asked to defend oneself" until the prosecution has evidence sufficient for conviction. Then they still have to prove it.

Well, I don't know how it's like where you live, but in democratic countries the burden of evidence needed usually varies with the consequences of being found guilty - just ask OJ Simpson.

From what you've told, I've gathered the following;

1. Someone complained about something you said.

2. Your boss asked you about it.

3. You explained yourself.

4. You faced no consequences after your little biology lesson.

5. Insofar it has reflected badly on anyone at all, it would appear to be whoever complained.

If you're pissed off because someone lied about you, like accusing you of stealing office supplies or whatever, that's only natural. But you're sounding like you believe it's inappropriate that the boss would ask you a question about office supplies (to continue the analogy) at all, and that the boss should give you the benefit of doubt until someone produces a video tape of you throwing staplers in a bag and jumping out of the window with your loot.

It sounds like you're angry that there exists people who can misunderstand or be over-sensitive. That's ok, I get angry sometimes that I don't crap gold coins, but we all got to deal with the world as it is.