That’s a complicated question. For the purpose of my experience with sexual harassment, it makes sense to think of me as a man.
Somehow it doesn’t surprise me that the guy you know who makes really nice concealed weaponry is from South Africa, the country that brought us side-mounted flamethrowers to ward off car jackers.
I think you misread my post. Dress (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with it. Men will look at women, women will look at men. This is how we work. This in no way allows for any form of verbal or physical engagement in any form, but to in some way seek to disallow looking at a person you may find to be attractive is just puritanical silliness. It is a small step from that position to not allowing men and women to work together, study together or be in public together. That is where the Taliban and Bob Jones University stand. I would hope most readers of this board would be uncomfortable with that solution.
Indeed it was about controlling women. Just like Angela Lansbury’s comments are the same thing, about controlling women.
There’s a whole lot of real estate between looking at someone in passing and staring at them or leering at body parts. The latter is harassing behavior, and almost always occurs in tandem with verbal and physical harassment.
Thank you. I’m glad you took it in the spirit in which I intended it, not an attack, but a plea to accept that as human beings, we have gaps in our knowledge, that we should endeavor to accept that, and to correct it when we can. There are so many things I don’t know and want to educate myself on and I’d hope all the happy mutants here would want to do the same.
If you ever need a history book recommendation on the modern era, let me know. I might have a recommendation for you.
You’re trying to compare something that you have to actively use (a gun) to something that passively permits you to act (safe shoes and clothing). That’s not valid.
It can help prevent a great deal of suffering. Every single time a person outran an attacker or a natural disaster, it was because they weren’t wearing shoes or skirts that prevented them from doing so. I’ve seen flood and tsunami videos on youtube that demonstrate this.
Which has to change. And it won’t, if everyone who tries to promote that change is going to categorized as a victim blamer. First steps, everyone who has the ability to change their local environment, do so now. Everyone who cares about women’s issues, stop admiring and promoting garments that disempower their wearers. Nothing will happen if we don’t make it happen.
I believe you are right. But I believe I can change the world anyway. Or at least my little corner of it… I have already eliminated neckties from my workplace. And I married a woman who doesn’t wear makeup or heels.
I’m not asking you to follow those rules - as I’ve said, I want you to be free to do as you choose - I’m asking you to stop trying to shout me down. Accusations of victim blaming are a call for censorship, an effective way to silence people.
Most blue jeans are stupid and should not be worn. Exceptions include those with crotch gussets and stretch panels that permit freedom of movement.
I very much respect your decision to focus your own effort where you believe it is more valuable. And I will do everything I can to help, but I’m probably going to fail any purity test that requires I never condemn stupid, gender-discriminatory fashion culture.
I really appreciate your kindness in sharing your views, and that you haven’t taken our differences of opinion as a sign that I’m a misogynist pig. I try pretty hard not to be one, but offline, because of my appearance, I get assumed guilty until proven innocent (which is totally fair, in my opinion, I have to say).
You’re cherry-picking one line from my post in order to misrepresent what I said. I offered no solution, I merely defend my custom of advising all people including women to wear clothing that permits self-defense. Thank god I didn’t mention guns, I guess.
That being said, if you are comfortable and unhindered by heavy armor then you should be able to wear it, just like I can, regardless of where you are and who you work for. It’s blatant sexist discrimination to object to women being able to defend themselves.
This one here, where people suffer and die because their clothes prevent them from dealing with completely unavoidable physical disasters such as tsunamis and fires - and also, where people are victimized by predators because they think it’s sane to unnecessarily bind themselves in clothing that makes them vulnerable. This world, where people get their necks snapped like twigs by their fine silk neckties and scarfs.
You think you don’t live in that world, you are fantasizing.
I don’t think wearing clothes will protect anyone from all harm. I don’t think anyone should be required to wear any particular clothing. I don’t think men who prefer that the women in their lives wear clothes that allow self-defense are condoning rape or victim blaming. I don’t think rapists will cease to exist in my lifetime unless humanity ceases to exist as a species.
Is it, now?
As with everything, context matters greatly. A mere passing glance isn’t harassment IMO, but some kinds of “gazes” totally can be.
Sure, sounds great.
I’ve read quite a bit about, oh, the '50’s, 60’s and 70’s, I guess.
I’ve an abiding interest in the civil rights movement.
I’ve read the Robert Caro books about Johnson and the Taylor Branch
books about the civil rights movement.
Also I enjoy Simon Schama and am eager to get his second “The Jews” book.
Oh also I’ve done some looking into the women’s movement.
The more the merrier.
No. I’m trying to offer you an analogy that you might get. You’ve seen the statistics on this board. Dressing for self defense doesn’t mean a damn thing in most rapes, in the same way that carrying a gun won’t protect you from bullets.
That’s just not true.
Only the people who keep insisting that women could be doing more to prevent rapes.
No.
No.
You’re not doing anything other than criticizing women for existing and trying to get by in this stupid society that they didn’t create.
You ARE. Your whole post is a declaration to women admonishing them for wearing the clothes that are sold to them, instead of wearing hospital scrubs and combat boots. I’m not shouting you down dude, I’m giving you examples of real life that punch holes in your ideas about women in rape, and you’re fighting me on it.
I can’t even answer this, it’s so ridiculous.
You’re actively contributing to the status quo with your belief that women could somehow be doing more to not be raped. If you want to rail against fashion, fine. STOP doing in discussions of rape. You’re trying to hold women to an impossible purity test of functional clothing, even though statistically it doesn’t matter!
I’m not so sure anymore.
And this is my point exactly. Verbal a/o physical harassment or intimidation are never OK, and yes, I agree, leering is unavoidably intimidating. Also, those actions are almost always about power, not attraction or sexuality. I am already seeing men (and I am one) responding to this swing in attitudes by taking the position that women cannot be part of any team that needs to work together out of fear of inadvertent “harassment.” I am not sure if you all will agree with me on this, but it is my opinion that true harassment is NEVER inadvertent.
The problem is that some men choose to double down on sexism when women talk about harassment, not the fact that women are finally speaking out about being treated as objects because they have female bodies.
If those men were really afraid on inadvertant harassment, they would listen to what women were saying and work to change instead of claiming that the problem is the presence of women, instead of their and their peers’ behavior.
I do not agree. The fact that some men can’t be bothered to examine they and their peer’s behavior, when in the face of sexism they see more sexism as the answer, is a solid illustration of some mens’ disengagement and inadvertant participation.
Can you name even one man, ever, who was fired simply for looking at women?
When we had our last sexual harassment prevention seminar at work, it was specifically told to the men in the audience that they could not not harass women. When asked what we (men) could do to avoid the appearance of harassment, we were told to avoid any casual interaction with women. To quote her “If you greet a woman who does not wish to be greeted she may feel harassed. If you fail to greet a woman who wishes to be greeted, she may feel harassed. If she feels harassed, she has been harassed. Your actions and intentions have no bearing on the situation. You should maintain a formal, strictly professional attitude at all times and never interact in a casual fashion.”
This is not about being fired. Believe it or not, there are still men out there (or out here) who very much want to not cause women to feel uncomfortable. In an era where “social norms” aren’t, I do feel that intent should count for something.
This isn’t a thread about men being judged for looking at women. It’s a thread about Lansbury’s highly insensitive claim that women who dress too attractively share the blame for their own harassment and assault.
Which is why I said I would only very slightly defend her, as there is no “she was too pretty” defense for rape, harassment or assault.
So, stick to work, easy enough, right?
This is a really stupid way of wording a basic premise. Women are humans with faces and body language and voices. Look at them and gauge their reactions in the same way you would men.
If you’re in a meeting and you consistently say hello to all the men, but not the two women, you’re excluding them. If you insist on wresting a hello from someone who is clearly ignoring you, by avoiding eye contact, turning away or who is just busy, you’re not respecting their wish to not interact with you.
It doesn’t mean you can’t be friendly. It means that you shoudn’t be trying to score a date or commenting on someone’s legs. Basically the same way you would interact with a male co-worker. Pretty basic.
I want to share this article written by a man about workplace harassment. Maybe share it if you’re sincere about your desire to not make women uncomfortable.
"Because the powers that be in these industries tend to look the other way or downplay the severity of the actions of creeps and predators, women share names amongst themselves: who’s safe, who’s ok unless they’ve been drinking, who they should never be alone in a room with.
Men, on the other hand, had a different reaction. Many men worried about “witch hunts”. Others posited a world where men might get hit with lawsuits for winking. From commenting on the unfairness of anonymous accusations without the ability to defend themselves to just being afraid of ending up on the list through innocent mistakes, many men seemed to take issue with the existence of the list itself.
The issue isn’t about people misunderstanding innocent flirtations or good guys getting caught up by oversensitive women. It’s about a culture of predation and harassment that’s endemic in multiple industries. However, there are lots of men – good, well-intentioned men – who are worried about tripping over the line. And there are others who worry that they themselves may end up on a similar list or having their name bandied about simply because they’re shy or awkward.
And so for them, I want to talk about what it means to not be The Creep at work, at the conference or in class
Whenever the topic of shitty and predatory behavior from men comes up, there are inevitably people who will chime in with “I avoid this by never interacting with women… ever.” Sometimes it’s sarcastic and other times it’s extremely serious. In fact, in some circles this is held up as “The Pence Rule” – after Vice President Mike Pence’s refusal to be alone with any woman who isn’t his wife.
First of all, when guys say this about flirting with or socializing with women, they’re saying “I’m aware that I don’t know how to find the line and I can’t be bothered to learn.” Which, let’s be real, isn’t a good look on you, my dude.
But the other issue is how this puts the blame on harassment and assault squarely on women. Because hey… men are fuckin’ animals amirite? It’s part and parcel of the same toxic masculinity tropes that says men are barely more than chimpanzees. In this outlook, men’s sexual self-control held in check by only the thinnest of margins. If a man and a woman are alone together for any reason then sex will inevitably come up. If sex comes up, then it’s a matter of time until the monster’s loose. And since men can’t control themselves, it’s on women to make sure that they’re never in a position to tempt a good man into slipping his leash.
You would do far better to be the mentor or sponsor to women at your job than to avoid them entirely. Being the advocate and ally at work is one of the best ways to support your female coworkers. All avoiding contact does is ensure the massive power differential between professional men and women never changes. That, in turn, helps empower the men who live to exploit that power differential.
Trying to, say, insist that creepiness has to be intentional just puts the onus on the victim. It’s telling someone that they need to justify their right to feel a certain way. If they can’t “prove” intent, then really they shouldn’t be complaining being creeped out.
But while it may be well-intentioned, this belief does far more harm than good. It becomes yet another cudgel used to silence people complaining about bad behavior, especially behavior that straddles the line of plausible ambiguity. Sure he fucked up but are you sure it was intentional? Are you absolutely sure that you’re not overreacting?
Does the fact that the touchy-feely “you need a massage!” guy doesn’t grok boundaries make your skin crawl less?
Here’s the thing: awkwardly brushing up against someone’s boundaries can be disturbing… but most awkward people live in fear of doing just that. Once they realize they’ve made a mistake, they feel awful. They almost always want to make it better, and dread making it worse by doing so. Awkward people want to learn and do better.
Creepers, on the other hand don’t care. They’ll deflect blame and duck responsibility. They’re the first to argue that maybe those boundaries shouldn’t be there. It’s not their fault. Really can’t you take a joke? Can’t you tell he’s not serious? It’s just ironic, man. Stop being so uptight.
If you want to be a good man, then you want to make a clear distinction between your professional self and your personal self. If you’re there to work, then you are there to work. Even if there is a flirty vibe and you’re sure they’re into you, it can wait until after the job is done. And even then, you’ll want to make absolutely damn sure that it’s there and that this is a good time to act on it. Your boner isn’t a mandate. Not every attraction needs to be pursued. You can let opportunities pass. It’s better to wait for ones that are less potentially problematic than to leap on the wrong one.
It doesn’t mean you have to be a robot. It doesn’t mean you can’t be friendly. But it does mean that you’re not there to flirt, get a date or otherwise pursue things that don’t relate immediately to work. One of the more obnoxious things you can do is to agree to a meet-up and then try to upgrade it into something more personal.
You don’t make any suggestive comments. You don’t offer to “be a little bad” by getting in an extra drink or two. No lingering casual touches. No turning the topic to sexual or romantic matters. If you’re at a professional or platonic get-together and feel like there’s a connection, wait until after it’s over and then ask “Hey, now that we’re done, would you like go out and get a drink with me?” You will draw a firm and visible line so that people know exactly where they stand with you and what they can expect from you.
It’s understandable that men may feel anxious as more and more women are standing up and pushing back against creepy and predatory behavior in society. But being a good man isn’t that hard. There isn’t an Inquisition looking to root out male sexuality. There is no “witch hunt”. Not being a creeper is very easy if you pay attention. Understanding why women get creeped out isn’t that hard. Keep things clear and aboveboard and you’ll be fine.
Part of being someone trustworthy and safe at work – whether you’re a playboy or not – is listening to women. Be the person who’s willing to hear them out and believe them. Be their support and their advocate. In an ocean of creeps and predators, be the guy who treats them with respect and as equals. That’s going to be far more important in the long run than worrying about someone overreacting to innocent flirting.
So what are you saying it is a defense for?
The problem with that is that each person has their own boundaries. So while you might be okay with one thing, the fact that another person isn’t doesn’t make them wrong for calling you out in a workplace that has to be comfortable for everyone who is there.
