Workplace Misconduct: Is there some guide for men to follow?

[bush_cheney2004]

1 hour ago, Bonam said:

I dunno. Women at the top will likely mean that claims of workplace sexual harassment will be investigated more fullheartedly than has sometimes been the case, but other than that, I would expect that women managers and executives will be just as hard (if not harder) on women under them as men are.

 

Agreed....I personally know of several woman v. woman sexual harassment and hostile work environments cases at previous places of employment going back to the 1980's...in the military and in corporate settings.   It is a common mistake to assume that the perps are always men, or even that the victims are always women.

Our HR training materials (now online media) always included examples of both male and female perps (played by actors).

Edited December 14, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[RB]

On ‎13‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 8:29 PM, Bonam said:

I dunno. Women at the top will likely mean that claims of workplace sexual harassment will be investigated more fullheartedly than has sometimes been the case, but other than that, I would expect that women managers and executives will be just as hard (if not harder) on women under them as men are. My experience is that women are much more judgmental of other women than men are. Further, women tend to play a lot of status games with each other in a way that men don't, and I would not be surprised if female executives would more often feel threatened by smart/attractive female subordinates compared to male executives feeling threatened by such subordinates. And, feeling threatened, they would prefer keeping the spotlight off such subordinates rather than giving them the opportunity to shine. 

I want to look at women gaining access to executive jobs in a positive light.   Currently there are less job opportunities at the top and plenty of qualified women to fill executive type jobs.  If there can be a level playing field for both men and women there will be a greater probability for change and less games.  The dynamics will change.

I don't deny women tend to want other women to have a similar experience  in terms of upward movement, and it is never simple - they are not in the network sphere of those in charge. The locker talk now-infamous 'Access Hollywood' tape B Bush Entertainment Tonight on the bus by Trump is a good example - women are excluded from this crowd, however women are the subject matter and in a not so desirable way for work. 

 

 

[WestCoastRunner]

On 12/5/2017 at 9:45 AM, OftenWrong said:

I think the question is whether or not its "safe" for a man to work alone with a woman or not. Given the current climate of media broadcasting every allegation, real or unfounded, the answer has to be not. Mike Pence is right.

Seriously?  Not safe? Ridiculous over-reaction.

[WestCoastRunner]

On 12/11/2017 at 5:38 PM, Argus said:

Our culture has decided that women are sexual objects, and must dress accordingly in order to make themselves look attractive to men. That the whole point of this is to make men want them might be lost on modern women, but that is the point. They're not wearing those push up bras to lift their breasts, or those uncomfortable high heels to elevate their buttocks for any other reason. Same goes for their lipstick. Yes, yes, they don't do it for men. They do it because that is how a woman looks attractive. WHY this is the fashion is not something they generally consider. But in dressing themselves as the culture says women must they ARE doing it to attract men, even if they aren't aware of that.

Yes, women are so stupid as to dress like a bimbo to have men be attracted to them.  Are you still living in the 50's ffs. Some of the men on here need to leave the 50's behind.

Edited December 16, 2017 by WestCoastRunner

[WestCoastRunner]

On 12/13/2017 at 5:29 PM, Bonam said:

I dunno. Women at the top will likely mean that claims of workplace sexual harassment will be investigated more fullheartedly than has sometimes been the case, but other than that, I would expect that women managers and executives will be just as hard (if not harder) on women under them as men are. My experience is that women are much more judgmental of other women than men are. Further, women tend to play a lot of status games with each other in a way that men don't, and I would not be surprised if female executives would more often feel threatened by smart/attractive female subordinates compared to male executives feeling threatened by such subordinates. And, feeling threatened, they would prefer keeping the spotlight off such subordinates rather than giving them the opportunity to shine. 

This is a well known myth that men (and some women) like to perpetuate.  Why they do this I have no idea.

Edited December 16, 2017 by WestCoastRunner

[bush_cheney2004]

Many women start to compete with each other in high school, starting with biggest boobs contests that continue into adulthood.

[OftenWrong]

13 minutes ago, WestCoastRunner said:

Seriously?  Not safe? Ridiculous over-reaction.

Not always. It depends who you are, your position in society for example. There are ruthless people on both sexes. 
I have even encountered it myself from time to time, as a manager in an engineering field. Young women who are hired on a contract have flirted with me, because they wanted a full-time job. I felt so- violated

[bush_cheney2004]

3 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Not always. It depends who you are, your position in society for example. There are ruthless people on both sexes. 
I have even encountered it myself from time to time, as a manager in an engineering field. Young women who are hired on a contract have flirted with me, because they wanted a full-time job. I felt so- violated

 

Agreed...as I have encountered women who do not hesitate to gain some advantage with sexual overtures.   My response to them is complete indifference, because I have seen what happens for too many men who take the bait.   We used to laugh at how many blouse buttons were opened depending on the woman involved.

 

 

[bush_cheney2004]

Sexual harassment allegations have been weaponized...here is a female perp taking the hit:

Quote

WASHINGTON 

Andrea Ramsey, a Democratic candidate for Congress, will drop out of the race after the Kansas City Star asked her about accusations in a 2005 lawsuit that she sexually harassed and retaliated against a male subordinate who said he had rejected her advances.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article189931704.html

 

The days of private "settlements" may be over for many.

Edited December 16, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

[taxme]

On 12/4/2017 at 8:26 PM, RB said:

The recent "me too" accusations of unwanted sexual advancement, sexual assault and sexual harassment misconduct allegations starting Weinstein and recently Matt Lauer along with notable names in the news (List of names domino effect since Weinstein), today Silicon Valley is named as notorious for having misconduct parties.  This is making the work environment tense for men especially.

Men want to know how to behave, do they shake hands with women? do they hug women still? No more jokes or wisecracks (e.g. taking a picture of 3 people and joking its a threesome) this is insensitive

There is a change of culture.  So, what is appropriate behavior.  How are we feeling with all this revelation of male misconduct.

 

It is getting to the point that just saying to a woman that you looking great today could get one into hot water especially if she is a lesbian. She may take offence to it and report you to the boss or the government. I have to wonder also if it is still safe to even look at a woman these days? I mean men will be men and we do enjoy looking, and at times can't help but look at some great looking woman out there, especially those at the beach when they are wearing their bikinis. If women don't want men to stare at them or compliment them then start wearing hunting outfits and army boots or a burka. That should do the job. Also stop wearing clothing that makes them look sexy. That will surely stop men from looking at them. But then again they might not than get a man. And isn't that what it is really all about? Looking and dressing sexy to get a man?  Otherwise men will be men so live with it. 

[RB]

Here is a tea analogy for consent.

 

[Argus]

What the whole issue has devolved to is the application of a suffocating corporate prohibition on normal human behaviour and interaction in order to prevent the occasional abuse. Weinstein was a man of huge power, and no morals, who both physically and verbally abused women, blankmailed them and punished them for not sleeping with them. I don't think there's any doubt about the need to remove such people.

Unfortunately, this reality has been stretched out of all recognition to apply to any man who says or does anything remotely offensive. The corporate mentality - and I include the media here, is determined to avoid controversy. That's it's only aim. It doesn't give a damn about women, nor men. It care about profits and thus its reputation.

And it ignores a truism about men. They are constantly seeking women's attention and approval, constantly seeking to impress them and seduce them. It's a biological/instinctive thing almost impossible to ignore. The history of the world is men doing this, and that has not really changed. The problem today is that if the approach is clumsy, or done by someone the target is not attracted to, it can result in severe repercusions in any kind of official setting, be it work or school.

[Argus]

A good read on this with some interesting truths.

Let me say that again: men need us. It’s silly to enter into a conversation about women and men without acknowledging the basic biological drives of our species. I’ve never known a heterosexual man who isn’t constantly preoccupied with thoughts of women. Their own nature is at work against self-possession: the sight or the thought of a woman can overturn a man’s thoughts, his will, and seriously compromise his reason and unbalance his ability to make decisions. At times, this preoccupation can manifest as anger and even hatred. Nobody is suggesting that misogyny isn’t real. Most of the time, however, men’s need of women results in clumsy attempts at flirtation or awkward and unwanted advances. From what I can tell, a large proportion of the #Metoo complaints are of this nature.

This is not to deny that there is real and brutal violence against women, best handled by the police and the criminal justice system. But if a co-worker lets a woman know she looks hot in her skirt this can reasonably be dealt with by a woman on her own, rather than by corporate structures of authority. If we would prefer not to deal with these things on our own, fair enough, but let us not re-describe this reliance on authority as a victory for feminism, or for women’s empowerment, and instead call it what it is: an instance of women’s dependence on structural power; a paternal bureaucracy that has arrogated ever more coercive power under the banner of gender equity.

https://quillette.com/2018/12/20/feminisms-dependency-trap/

[dialamah]

4 hours ago, Argus said:

A good read on this with some interesting truths.

Let me say that again: men need us. It’s silly to enter into a conversation about women and men without acknowledging the basic biological drives of our species. I’ve never known a heterosexual man who isn’t constantly preoccupied with thoughts of women. Their own nature is at work against self-possession: the sight or the thought of a woman can overturn a man’s thoughts, his will, and seriously compromise his reason and unbalance his ability to make decisions. 

Isn't this the same logic used by some religions to impose a "modest" dress code on women?  "Men cannot control themselves in the face of the temptation of women.  It is, therefore, up to women to manage male uncontrolled response to them."

Here's a thought: men should be expected to be responsible for their own behavior, and if they cannot be, then to face the consequences, including that which comes from "structural power."

Edited December 23, 2018 by dialamah

[Argus]

11 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Isn't this the same logic used by some religions to impose a "modest" dress code on women?  "Men cannot control themselves in the face of the temptation of women.  It is, therefore, up to women to manage male uncontrolled response to them."

No. It's not even remotely the same. And if you'd bothered to read the cite you'd know that.

Quote

Here's a thought: men should be expected to be responsible for their own behavior, and if they cannot be, then to face the consequences, including that which comes from "structural power."

Of course, being responsible for behaviour conflicts with having your behaviour judged by irrational people and an irrational system.

"Oh? You said something flattering about a picture of a model? You're fired!"

There is a lack of reasonableness on the part of those enforcing the new puritan codes of conduct.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Argus

[Shady]

21 hours ago, Argus said:

There is a lack of reasonableness on the part of those enforcing the new puritan codes of conduct.

It's definitely ironic that the puritans have now become the people on the left.

[Argus]

44 minutes ago, Truth Detector said:

It's definitely ironic that the puritans have now become the people on the left.

There was always something of this in them. Back when there was a concerted effort to ban pornography, for example, the Left were every bit as determined as the social conservatives. When it comes to things like strip clubs they're even more outraged. The main difference on sexual themes, I think, is the Left is mostly outraged at heterosexual sex and porn. There is some incredibly nasty gay porn out there the Left shows little interest in addressing. Nor have they ever cared about the wild sexual goings on at gay saunas and the like. What gets them fulminating is the idea of men and women together, largely because they presume in most of these cases the sex is exploitative in nature.

This metoo thing is ready made for that. The nature of our society is still that men pursue women through art, flirtation, seduction. It is left to the man to work up the courage to approach a woman as creatively as he can. The nature of her response is generally governed by how attractive he is and how sophisticated/clever his approach. And the assessment of THAT is an individual thing. That leaves guys with the problem that any approach to any woman they work with or go to school with can damage their career/education. Women, on the other hand, are perfectly free to accept or reject such approaches without fear. It's not exactly equality, is it.

[eyeball]

On 12/24/2018 at 12:12 PM, Argus said:

There is some incredibly nasty gay porn out there the Left shows little interest in addressing. Nor have they ever cared about the wild sexual goings on at gay saunas and the like.

How do you know?

[Donnie]

On 12/4/2017 at 11:34 PM, bcsapper said:

If you wouldn't do it to your mother, don't do it to your colleague.

In the workplace Im very strict.  Handshakes only.  The end.

I never date, go out, have drinks with women I work with.  Never.

That's just my rules for myself. So far no one has sued me.  Lol.