Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Science vs. Scruples
Options
Replies
-
sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.5 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
8 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
It's not just the socialization that makes it difficult for women to say such things (although that certainly exists). There is the knowledge that saying such things to a very prominent person in your field may limit your career and networking opportunities. People like Aragon (and Louis C.K. and Harvey Weinstein and Les Moonves and Glen Thrush) have a power in this situation that includes, but goes beyond, women being socialized not to saying "You're being offensive and I'm leaving." Big men (and women) in an industry have the power to influence careers and not always for good.
Men can and do seek "payback" after being rejected by women and it doesn't always take the form of them clearly disclosing that they were rejected by them. Would Aragon have done that if he was clearly and firmly rejected? I don't know. But if I was in that situation, the thought would certainly occur to me.
9 -
I am troubled today to learn about some very disturbing accusations against one of the most influential figures in the fitness and nutrition industry: Alan Aragon.
https://deadspin.com/how-celebrity-nutritionist-alan-aragon-used-his-status-1828684798
This is a person that has contributed greatly to the field by championing a scientific approach that relies on evidence-based information and objective reasoning in an industry that is flooded with charlatans and snake-oil salesman.
Alan will likely face a major personal downfall over this, but no doubt he will eventually continue to produce valuable science to the field. Is it moral to contribute to an immoral person's financial gain by subscribing to their research reviews, reading their scientific papers, attending their speaking events, following them on social media, etc.? Should their professional insight be shunned so that knowledge is intentionally suppressed due to personal moral objection?
It's a shame that someone who has made so many contributions to the field now appears to be a complete power tripping *kitten* preying on women at these events. The only positive I can see is that the direct control of these women's careers is hopefully not influenced now that he is exposed for his actions.
Until or unless he gets his act together and takes appropriate actions to make these wrongs right, I wouldn't so much as click a link if it helps him in any way.3 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.7 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
Actually, there was no crime committed (in the strict definition of the law). Since Title VII does not provide for criminal punishment of the offense of harassment, it devolves to a matter for the Civil courts to adjudicate and resolve. Does harassment break the law? Yes. Can you call the cops and have someone arrested for harassment? No. Therefore, it is not a crime. Is it reprehensible for AA to have done this? Absolutely. Was it a crime? No.
I am not aware of the particulars in this case, but if the harassment went beyond the spoken word and involved physical contact without prior permission, then yes, AA committed a crime - but the crime is assault and not harassment.janejellyroll wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
It's not just the socialization that makes it difficult for women to say such things (although that certainly exists). There is the knowledge that saying such things to a very prominent person in your field may limit your career and networking opportunities. People like Aragon (and Louis C.K. and Harvey Weinstein and Les Moonves and Glen Thrush) have a power in this situation that includes, but goes beyond, women being socialized not to saying "You're being offensive and I'm leaving." Big men (and women) in an industry have the power to influence careers and not always for good.
Men can and do seek "payback" after being rejected by women and it doesn't always take the form of them clearly disclosing that they were rejected by them. Would Aragon have done that if he was clearly and firmly rejected? I don't know. But if I was in that situation, the thought would certainly occur to me.
Women do the same thing - it may not be as wide spread as men, but it does happen.6 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?7 -
"A Guide to Derailing Conversations
You know how it is. You’re enjoying yourself, kicking back and relaxing at the pub or maybe at the library; or maybe you’re in class or just casually surfing the internet, indulging in a little conversation. The topic of the conversation is about a pertinent contemporary issue, probably something to do with a group of people who fall outside your realm of experience and identity. They’re also probably fairly heavily discriminated against – or so they claim.
The thing is, you’re having a good time, sharing your knowledge about these people and their issues. This knowledge is incontrovertible – it’s been backed up in media representation, books, research and lots and lots of historical events, also your own unassailable sense of being right.
Yet all of a sudden something happens to put a dampener on your sharing of your enviable intellect and incomparable capacity to fully perceive and understand all things. It’s someone who belongs to the group of people you’re discussing and they’re not very happy with you. Apparently, they claim, you’ve got it all wrong and they’re offended about that. They might be a person of color or a queer person. Maybe they’re a woman, or a person with disability. They could even be a trans person or a sex worker. The point is they’re trying to tell you they know better than you about their issues and you know that’s just plain wrong. How could you be wrong?
Don’t worry though! There IS something you can do to nip this potentially awkward and embarrassing situation in the bud. By simply derailing the conversation, dismissing their opinion as false and ridiculing their experience you can be sure that they continue to be marginalized and unheard and you can continue to look like the expert you know you really are, deep down inside!
CONGRATULATIONS, YOU HAVE PRIVILEGE!"
http://www.derailingfordummies.com/10 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
Actually, there was no crime committed (in the strict definition of the law). Since Title VII does not provide for criminal punishment of the offense of harassment, it devolves to a matter for the Civil courts to adjudicate and resolve. Does harassment break the law? Yes. Can you call the cops and have someone arrested for harassment? No. Therefore, it is not a crime. Is it reprehensible for AA to have done this? Absolutely. Was it a crime? No.
I am not aware of the particulars in this case, but if the harassment went beyond the spoken word and involved physical contact without prior permission, then yes, AA committed a crime - but the crime is assault and not harassment.janejellyroll wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
It's not just the socialization that makes it difficult for women to say such things (although that certainly exists). There is the knowledge that saying such things to a very prominent person in your field may limit your career and networking opportunities. People like Aragon (and Louis C.K. and Harvey Weinstein and Les Moonves and Glen Thrush) have a power in this situation that includes, but goes beyond, women being socialized not to saying "You're being offensive and I'm leaving." Big men (and women) in an industry have the power to influence careers and not always for good.
Men can and do seek "payback" after being rejected by women and it doesn't always take the form of them clearly disclosing that they were rejected by them. Would Aragon have done that if he was clearly and firmly rejected? I don't know. But if I was in that situation, the thought would certainly occur to me.
Women do the same thing - it may not be as wide spread as men, but it does happen.
My post isn't, in any way, a claim that this hasn't ever happened.
In any case, this was addressing the multiple factors that might keep a woman from saying "You're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation like the ones that Alan Aragon repeatedly created. If we were talking about a prominent woman creating situations like this, I would listen to men (or women) who may have experienced it and try to learn to what might be concerns for them in that situation.2 -
Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?
Unwanted sexual attention, sexualized comments, or unwanted contact is very frequent or relatively frequent for some women. It's happened to me in the workplace (more than one), in the grocery store, on city buses, on the sidewalk, at the park, a college classroom, a public swimming pool, and the homes of a couple of friends. Oh, and my own house.
Women can't "just leave" their own lives.11 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »Honestly, yes I probably am downplaying assault. Are you "upplaying" it, or is that my own sensitivities impacting how I read/interpret your post? IMO, rape is not the same thing as grabbing someone's butt. But both are labeled as assault (at least as I understand it here in the States). And that was my point - not everyone who has been accused of assault should be viewed or treated the same way. Different situations can and do have very different circumstances. Some people are scumbags, thru and thu, no doubt. But not everyone.
A grope and a rape are never treated equally. Not by anyone, not by any justice system in any country. That’s not your opinion, that’s facts. If you are downplaying what he did do with “well it’s not like he raped anyone” that is... wow. What he actually did do is violate multiple women’s personal space, made them feel uncomfortable and maybe even afraid for their safety at work, possibly restricting their opportunities for career advancement. This behaviour hurts people, it can affect self esteem, confidence, where you feel able to work and be welcome and since he then tried to label one of the women involved as a fantasist that could affect how potential employers and sponsors view her character and she could lose out financially. He did this repeatedly, with apparently no fear of ever being called out and you have to assume would have continued until he was made to stop. Is that not enough to be angry about?
I think the issue is this.
If something a crime then it should be punished within the criminal justice system. If something is not a crime then is it then the role of the public to exact whatever punishment they see fit through public pressure?
If we all agree groping is wrong then it should be a crime and if someone gropes someone it should be a criminal offense....the punishment given and enforced by the judicial system. The issue is if the person isnt convicted and therefore is not punished quite often the public basically attempts to hang them in the court of public opinion. And for that to happen all it takes is for some members of the public to just be convinced the person is guilty for whatever reason.
I get that....but it also makes me uncomfortable. I feel like we have a justice system for a reason and if someone should be punished for bad behavior it should be through that system where there is some accountability and clear punishments....not via social media and ostracism or job loss.
Sure the public, and his industry, should respond how they see fit. There is a role for the judicial system in punishing the offender, but that doesn't mean that has to be the only consequence. The judicial system has no way of removing or banning someone from their industry. Just because someone has had a punishment decreed, or not, by the judicial system (and we have all seen how that works) doesn't mean that the public, or his industry, has to accept him back into the fold. Why should they? To give him back his platform? That he abused to begin with?
I hear all the time when these kinds things hit the news that I should let the courts decide before I form an opinion. But there is no burden of proof in the court of public opinion - we are free to come to our own conclusions and respond accordingly.
There is a difference between pressure being put on someone who sells something through normal market forces due to their poor behavior and social media campaigns to bring someone down.
If a business person does something wrong and their customers get word of it and their customers decide that they don't want to financially support someone who would do those things that is perfectly fine...that doesn't make me uncomfortable. What makes me a bit uncomfortable is in todays world where a buisness person can do something wrong and the general public hears of it through social media that goes viral and a huge amount of the public then puts pressure on associates of that buisness person to fire that person for it regardless of whether or not they are actually customers at all. That is where it gets a little like trial-by-public and mob-ish.
I am not necessarily speaking towards this particular case, I just mean in general.7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?
Unwanted sexual attention, sexualized comments, or unwanted contact is very frequent or relatively frequent for some women. It's happened to me in the workplace (more than one), in the grocery store, on city buses, on the sidewalk, at the park, a college classroom, a public swimming pool, and the homes of a couple of friends. Oh, and my own house.
Women can't "just leave" their own lives.
OK. That's a shame. I guess I don't have anything else to add to this conversation then.2 -
I keep coming back to this thread to post, then I keep deleting my post and leaving... rinse and repeat.
There seems to be a lot of emotion involved in this topic which is making it hard for people to read/listen to what others are saying. Yes, this includes me. There are a lot of layers to this topic...
Agreed. As a white male I especially feel squeamish about giving my opinion on these sorts of things. But justice really shouldn't be about gender or skin-color and so the very fact that I am made to feel hesitant about it also bothers me.
Social media has changed our world. It has made it so it is possible for someone who gets enough notice via social media to literally destroy someones life not through pressing charges through the criminal justice system but rather by appealing to the public's emotions. That should bother people shouldn't it? The whole reason we have a justice system is to prevent that sort of thing from happening by providing a means for punishment to be enacted that is transparent and predicated on evidence. If a crime was committed, charges should be filed. The fact that you can get punishment met out by instead going to the public directly through social media is not really a good thing in my opinion.
I do not know enough about this specific case to comment. Clearly if this guy groped or otherwise violated women (or anyone really) then that should be looked into and punished. The problem with doing it via public action is there is no way to fit the punishment to the crime. If you think it is okay to do that then I'd be curious to ask what crimes you think that is appropriate to do in and what crimes you do not, or is public action always a legitimate way to handle punishment?7 -
sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
For what it is worth I think your joke towards the metoo movement was crass and inconsiderate of what I think is a lot of legitimate suffering and problems in our society that need to be addressed. That said if you want to make a crass joke in public that is your prerogative and I'm not going to jump down your throat about it or pretend that it was anything other than a joke....just makes me lose a bit of respect. There are better ways to handle it.7 -
nevermind.
I need to listen to Herm Edwards - "DON'T PRESS SEND"2 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »I keep coming back to this thread to post, then I keep deleting my post and leaving... rinse and repeat.
There seems to be a lot of emotion involved in this topic which is making it hard for people to read/listen to what others are saying. Yes, this includes me. There are a lot of layers to this topic...
Agreed. As a white male I especially feel squeamish about giving my opinion on these sorts of things. But justice really shouldn't be about gender or skin-color and so the very fact that I am made to feel hesitant about it also bothers me.
Social media has changed our world. It has made it so it is possible for someone who gets enough notice via social media to literally destroy someones life not through pressing charges through the criminal justice system but rather by appealing to the public's emotions. That should bother people shouldn't it? The whole reason we have a justice system is to prevent that sort of thing from happening by providing a means for punishment to be enacted that is transparent and predicated on evidence. If a crime was committed, charges should be filed. The fact that you can get punishment met out by instead going to the public directly through social media is not really a good thing in my opinion.
I do not know enough about this specific case to comment. Clearly if this guy groped or otherwise violated women (or anyone really) then that should be looked into and punished. The problem with doing it via public action is there is no way to fit the punishment to the crime. If you think it is okay to do that then I'd be curious to ask what crimes you think that is appropriate to do in and what crimes you do not, or is public action always a legitimate way to handle punishment?
Question: are we talking about this as a literal crime or are we talking about this as a breach of decent behavior?
Because I think a fair bit of the "me too" stuff less as literal crimes (although many of them are and should be handled appropriately), I think of them as breaches of decent behavior. And I'm perfectly fine with breaches of decent behavior being handled publicly, with people deciding for themselves how much they want to associate with and support someone who is actively engaging in it or has engaged in it and not constructively addressed what it has done to others.
I'm less interested in whether or not Aragon committed an actual violation of the law and more in whether or not he's a person who is contributing to a culture in his profession where women can't fully participate as equals.
Edit: And I'm obviously not the gatekeeper, but I think it's perfectly appropriate for everyone -- including white men -- to be involved in that conversation. I just think that anyone who hasn't personally been on the "receiving end" of this behavior or doesn't understand how it can impact one's professional and social life should be aware of that and be receptive to hearing from those who have felt the impact.9 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?
Unwanted sexual attention, sexualized comments, or unwanted contact is very frequent or relatively frequent for some women. It's happened to me in the workplace (more than one), in the grocery store, on city buses, on the sidewalk, at the park, a college classroom, a public swimming pool, and the homes of a couple of friends. Oh, and my own house.
Women can't "just leave" their own lives.
OK. That's a shame. I guess I don't have anything else to add to this conversation then.
I think everyone who is participating in good faith (which is how I took your question) can add to the conversation. We just have different pieces of the "puzzle" and we should all be open to what we might not know.2 -
janejellyroll wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?
Unwanted sexual attention, sexualized comments, or unwanted contact is very frequent or relatively frequent for some women. It's happened to me in the workplace (more than one), in the grocery store, on city buses, on the sidewalk, at the park, a college classroom, a public swimming pool, and the homes of a couple of friends. Oh, and my own house.
Women can't "just leave" their own lives.
I can relate to this.janejellyroll wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »Cassandraw3 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
Are you implying that sexual harassment is not a crime? Because in the United States, where I am from and where A.A. also lives, it is. Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
"It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.
Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted)."
So to answer your question, yes. A crime was committed.
I'm probably going to regret this, but in the incidents that I saw described, the women were neither employees nor job applicants, so no crime was committed under the federal statute cited.
Some of the incidents involved physical contact, so there may have been crimes under the relevant state codes wherever the incidents took place.
Other incidents apparently involved really offensive verbal statements made in what were semi-social, networking/after-party situations in bars. Which sounds like a guy being a jerk. I don't have a problem with people who become aware that someone is a jerk saying they don't want to have anything to do with him, whether it's watching him speak or reading his research or whatever. But, as a woman, I do think that it just distracts from the really bad stuff that happens (physical assaults and harassment in situations in which your job or future employment or promotion is on the line) if we accord the same horror to a situation in which a woman remains sitting in a booth at a bar with a guy who's saying stuff she doesn't want to hear, texting her friends (in the next booth!) to get her out of an uncomfortable social situation because she can't bring yourself to say, "You're being offensive and I'm leaving," and then leave.
Maybe we need to put a little bit of our energy into overcoming the socialization that makes it difficult for a woman to say, "you're being offensive and I'm leaving" in a situation which involves little to no physical or professional risk. Yes, I know there's a real possibility he'll call her a *kitten* or a c**t, and that's no fun, and to get into her face while he's doing it. But there was a bar full of people, including her friends in the next booth, and staff and management of the bar that almost certainly is going to side with a woman being yelled at by the abusive drunk. If we can't stand up for ourselves in those circumstances, when can we?
Reading the entire article, there were 2 event employees that came forward as being inappropriately touched. In this case, he was hired as the keynote speaker for the event. Under Federal Law, this is sexual harassment.
ETA: I would also like to add that many, if not all, of these women told him to back off. It stopped him for a second. If you imply that any time a woman is sexually harassed, she should leave, then women would never leave their house.
Hyperbole?
Unwanted sexual attention, sexualized comments, or unwanted contact is very frequent or relatively frequent for some women. It's happened to me in the workplace (more than one), in the grocery store, on city buses, on the sidewalk, at the park, a college classroom, a public swimming pool, and the homes of a couple of friends. Oh, and my own house.
Women can't "just leave" their own lives.
OK. That's a shame. I guess I don't have anything else to add to this conversation then.
I think everyone who is participating in good faith (which is how I took your question) can add to the conversation. We just have different pieces of the "puzzle" and we should all be open to what we might not know.
Agreed. I think it's important for women to remember that many of us simply don't talk to the men around us about this sort of thing, they have no frame of reference. When they see something like this in a news story, they think it's unusual. I have had conversations with men I know who are honestly shocked by some of the experiences I have had and how they have affected the way I live my life. Having these sorts of conversations, especially IRL, I think can help.7 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
For what it is worth I think your joke towards the metoo movement was crass and inconsiderate of what I think is a lot of legitimate suffering and problems in our society that need to be addressed. That said if you want to make a crass joke in public that is your prerogative and I'm not going to jump down your throat about it or pretend that it was anything other than a joke....just makes me lose a bit of respect. There are better ways to handle it.
My consideration runs low when convictions are handed out without due process and based on hearsay. Human beings don't get upset at statements that are false. Emotion requires an element of truth.
How many #metoo accusations resulted in criminal convictions or even indictments? How many #metoo accusations were provably false?
I am taking this personally and emotionally invested because I have spent the better part of a my life working with and helping actual rape survivors regain some semblance of normalcy.
I have a close colleague who was falsely accused of rape. I was brought into this accusers false story, but luckily for me I reportedly took the "victim" to an abortion clinic - I had the luxury of being perceived as an "ally". While my friend's life was torn apart the individual making the false accusation never experienced any repercussions from her actions. My friend was on the brink of suicide and this still haunts him 20 years later.
Are there better ways to handle it? Possibly, but supporting the pyramid scheme of victim hierarchy is not a viable solution. It has demonstrably made society worse.
6 -
Aaron_K123 wrote: »sunfastrose wrote: »Anyone else find the hilarity behind the use of the "pound sign" # in this?
PoundMeToo
I should have stopped reading here; this "joke" is so puerile that I don't know how I could have believed any discussion of value would be in this post.I see it as a farce and the inevitable conclusion of worshiping celebrities. Assuming both parties are responsible adults of sound mind then it is up to both to accept the responsibility that comes with power and autonomy. You can't desire power without the responsibility that comes with it. Peter Parker would still be crying in a bedroom somewhere and the story would have sucked, much like every victim narrative.
The women were at professional conferences and events associated with them. What are they meant to be held responsible for? Talking to other people in their profession while believing they should be safe from being treated as sexual objects? What hussies, believing that they should be accorded respect.
I bow to your shaming skills.
Was a crime committed? ...or does that matter? ...offense has been committed and the mob demands blood.
For what it is worth I think your joke towards the metoo movement was crass and inconsiderate of what I think is a lot of legitimate suffering and problems in our society that need to be addressed. That said if you want to make a crass joke in public that is your prerogative and I'm not going to jump down your throat about it or pretend that it was anything other than a joke....just makes me lose a bit of respect. There are better ways to handle it.
My consideration runs low when convictions are handed out without due process and based on hearsay. Human beings don't get upset at statements that are false. Emotion requires an element of truth.
How many #metoo accusations resulted in criminal convictions or even indictments? How many #metoo accusations were provably false?
I am taking this personally and emotionally invested because I have spent the better part of a my life working with and helping actual rape survivors regain some semblance of normalcy.
I have a close colleague who was falsely accused of rape. I was brought into this accusers false story, but luckily for me I reportedly took the "victim" to an abortion clinic - I had the luxury of being perceived as an "ally". While my friend's life was torn apart the individual making the false accusation never experienced any repercussions from her actions. My friend was on the brink of suicide and this still haunts him 20 years later.
Are there better ways to handle it? Possibly, but supporting the pyramid scheme of victim hierarchy is not a viable solution. It has demonstrably made society worse.
Not based on hearsay, and not false. The most recent incidents were witnessed. This was ongoing, repeated, and escalating behaviour. Or should we all just have waited until he did rape someone?8
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 389 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 919 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions