Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 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.

 

Agreed, but it goes way back, long before today's high profile cases and social media shaming.

We started getting formal sexual harassment training on an annual basis back in the early 1980's, about the same time that all the excesses of business relationships and travel were being reigned in.   The training was documented by HR for compliance and potential lawsuits.   People who didn't change started to get fired on top of large payouts to victims....companies could no longer tolerate the behaviour because of the liability. The Hollywood film "9 to 5" (1980) famously spoofed such common excesses by mostly male superiors, but coworkers and female bosses were not innocent in such matters.

These common workplace elements were changed or eliminated by HR edict and altered employee behaviour:

  • "Swedish Bikini Team" (of U.S. beer commercial fame) and like minded wall calendars/posters from offices and work spaces
  • Happy hour drinking binges by coworkers and/or superiors for "team building"
  • Company holiday parties with open bar...one drink ticket per employee instead.
  • Vulnerable "secretaries" became an endangered species because of technology....the few that remained became "Executive Assistants".
  • Co-ed business travel and industry conventions were cut way back and layered with more rules and restrictions
  • Workplace romances were stifled by HR rules for direct reporting employees
  • Dress codes were beefed up to keep "temptation" and "flirtation" out of the workplace.

Males (and females) were said to "get it" once they voluntarily changed their behaviours and language, those that didn't were eventually shown the door after warnings and reprimands, unless they had more organizational power than HR.   Females started to get more promotions to leadership positions (and power).

A big casualty of all this was workplace mentoring...many males started playing it very safe so as to avoid even the appearance of sexual harassment.  The pendulum swung back a bit once the new norm was established, but some sectors never made the leap (government, media, etc.), as they preferred to just keep paying the private settlements over sanctioning or termination of high revenue producing men/women.

Hollywood is/was the perfect breeding ground for continued sexual harassment by its very nature and film productions.  

 

Edited by bush_cheney2004
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 Males (and females) were said to "get it" once they voluntarily changed their behaviours and language, those that didn't were eventually shown the door after warnings and reprimands, unless they had more organizational power than HR.   Females started to get more promotions to leadership positions (and power).  

I have worked in vastly varied workplaces over my career.  Some were predominantly white male with very few exceptions.  Some were young people of mixed race and gender.  Some were mostly Indian and youngish to middle age.  Some had many openly gay employees who would bring partners to company events.

There have been changes, for sure, but I think the biggest change I have seen, gender wise, is in the young women and men who seem to me to be very hard working and understanding of the line between professional and personal.  These people, though, have come of age in the 'gig' economy where your next contract could depend on how professional you *were* on the last one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

I think what's more revealing is the dynamic of power that seems to impart a sense of licence to people that possess it.  The inappropriate application of power in a sexual context is just the tip of a very large iceberg of misconduct that spans a wide spectrum of behaviour.

I'll be especially impressed when I see a list of governments and corporations falling like dominoes for the same fundamental reason the aforementioned list of men are falling.

Edited by eyeball
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Time has named appropriately the "Silence Breakers" person of the year for 2017.  It is a movement that is current, and people are taking notice...for now.

I think change would be registered when women and men hold power equally, and women supporting women in companies instead of current majority of men holding power position and women in power keeping other women out.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

An oversimplification, that if followed could get you fired. 

Would I ask my mother for a hug? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I compliment my mother, if she changed her hair, bought a new outfit? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I ask my mother to lunch, and buy her drinks? yes. Co-worker.? No.
Would I make a joke that has some element of sex in front of my mother? Yes. Co-worker? No.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Jariax said:

An oversimplification, that if followed could get you fired. 

Would I ask my mother for a hug? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I compliment my mother, if she changed her hair, bought a new outfit? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I ask my mother to lunch, and buy her drinks? yes. Co-worker.? No.
Would I make a joke that has some element of sex in front of my mother? Yes. Co-worker? No.

 

True.  Apart from the joke bit.

 

What Goddess said then.  If I wouldn't want anyone else to do it to my mother...

Edited by bcsapper
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

True.  Apart from the joke bit.

 

What Goddess said then.  If I wouldn't want anyone else to do it to my mother...

Maybe someone already saw the latest South Park mocking this present problem with humor too. I don't see a link yet on the part, but it has Randy, the father of Stan, looking with a group of others seeking Trump who is a wild animal on the loose in the forest in this episode. They think they've found him in a camping tent deep in the woods. But when Randy opens the tent, he discovers that it is Principle [P.C. Principle] with the Vice Principle having sex. 

Randy immediately pukes then runs back to the group hunting for Trump. The group asks him if its Trump and he informs them in shock that it is much worse! He stumbles trying to break the news to them with hesitancy. He warns them that it is very traumatic and then tells them:

"I don't know how to tell you, it was the PC Principle having relations with the Vice Principle!" Everyone at first doubts this horrible atrocity and run to see for themselves. When they realize its truth, they all start puking in horror.

 Screaming animated emoticon

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jariax said:

Would I ask my mother for a hug? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I compliment my mother, if she changed her hair, bought a new outfit? yes. Co-worker? No.
Would I ask my mother to lunch, and buy her drinks? yes. Co-worker.? No.
Would I make a joke that has some element of sex in front of my mother? Yes. Co-worker? No.

Oh no, I have committed a 4.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

That's silly. I do lots of stuff with friends I wouldn't do with my mother. It also presumes that during the 8+ hours we're at work we're robots. Why do we have to be robots? We sleep for 8 hours (or hopefully something close to it), and in the remaining eight we have to journey to and from work, which takes anywhere from 1-2 hours, and sometimes more. We have to eat breakfast and dinner - and prepare them. We have to shower, shave, do makeup, etc. We have to take care of kids if we have them and do whatever chores need doing.

And then once at work we have to behave like robots without feelings. And by the way, if you're single, the people you're going to spend most of the time around are going to be people you work with. No making friends or acting like friends? No joking around? No going out afterwards? 

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Argus said:

That's silly. I do lots of stuff with friends I wouldn't do with my mother. It also presumes that during the 8+ hours we're at work we're robots. Why do we have to be robots? We sleep for 8 hours (or hopefully something close to it), and in the remaining eight we have to journey to and from work, which takes anywhere from 1-2 hours, and sometimes more. We have to eat breakfast and dinner - and prepare them. We have to shower, shave, do makeup, etc. We have to take care of kids if we have them and do whatever chores need doing.

And then once at work we have to behave like robots without feelings. And by the way, if you're single, the people you're going to spend most of the time around are going to be people you work with. No making friends or acting like friends? No joking around? No going out afterwards? 

Yeah, it was pointed out to me already, that I might do things with my mother that might get me fired if I did them to my colleague.

So if you wouldn't want someone else doing it to your mother would be more like it.

As to the "No making friends or acting like friends? No joking around? No going out afterwards?", that's entirely up to the person you're dealing with.  You might be able to, or you might get fired.  It wouldn't be up to you.  I need my job at the moment, so no, none of that.

Edited by bcsapper
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bcsapper said:

As to the "No making friends or acting like friends? No joking around? No going out afterwards?", that's entirely up to the person you're dealing with.  You might be able to, or you might get fired.  It wouldn't be up to you.  I need my job at the moment, so no, none of that.

Only because of stringent HR rules written, for the most part, by people with sticks up their asses and filled with leftist jargon that ignores human reality.

"Hey, someone might do something."

"OH MY GOD! We'd better impose a whole raft of rules barring any sort of conduct remotely similar to that!"

I still have  very, very good friends - the majority female --  practically family, from places I haven't worked for in a decade. I never would have made those friends if we had to act like robots and never say or do anything that might possibly be construed as offensive.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Argus said:

I still have  very, very good friends - the majority female --  practically family, from places I haven't worked for in a decade. I never would have made those friends if we had to act like robots and never say or do anything that might possibly be construed as offensive.

World was a different place a decade (or more) ago when you made those friends. Main difference being that it was a world mostly without social media. Today, if you don't act the robot, you'd face a fairly high risk of finding yourself publicly shamed on social media, cast out from your friend's circle lest your shame spread onto them, and then fired from your job. In 2017 North America anyway, where an absurd wave of uptightness is sweeping through the public psyche. It really is a fascinating phenomenon to watch as an outsider looking in. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bonam said:

World was a different place a decade (or more) ago when you made those friends. Main difference being that it was a world mostly without social media. Today, if you don't act the robot, you'd face a fairly high risk of finding yourself publicly shamed on social media, cast out from your friend's circle lest your shame spread onto them, and then fired from your job. In 2017 North America anyway, where an absurd wave of uptightness is sweeping through the public psyche. It really is a fascinating phenomenon to watch as an outsider looking in. 

I don't find it fascinating. I find it obnoxious and irritating to see these self-righteous prigs who look like they should be wearing bonnets and waving a bible telling everyone how to behave.

And a lot of it fits in with feminist prog thought in its anti-male nature.

How have schools changed in the last generation? They've taken on the character of female culture. All behaviour which would typically be ascribed to girls is considered acceptable and proper. The behaviour you would have expected to find in boys is derided as obnoxious, dangerous, and ill-suited to schools. The result is girls ta all levels of academia are thriving and boys at all levels of academia are doing poorly.

This carries that into work behaviour. Female approved behaviour is mandatory. Anything that might be associated with typical male behaviour is frowned on if not outright banned. And no, I'm not talking about groping someone or taking out Mister Winkee to show the girl in the next cubicle over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Argus said:

I don't find it fascinating. I find it obnoxious and irritating to see these self-righteous prigs who look like they should be wearing bonnets and waving a bible telling everyone how to behave.

And a lot of it fits in with feminist prog thought in its anti-male nature.

How have schools changed in the last generation? They've taken on the character of female culture. All behaviour which would typically be ascribed to girls is considered acceptable and proper. The behaviour you would have expected to find in boys is derided as obnoxious, dangerous, and ill-suited to schools. The result is girls ta all levels of academia are thriving and boys at all levels of academia are doing poorly.

This carries that into work behaviour. Female approved behaviour is mandatory. Anything that might be associated with typical male behaviour is frowned on if not outright banned. And no, I'm not talking about groping someone or taking out Mister Winkee to show the girl in the next cubicle over.

Oh, I mostly agree with you, as you know. But North America is not the only place in the world, and 2017 is not the only point in time. This too will pass. Self-defeating ideology is self-defeating. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Argus said:

And a lot of it fits in with feminist prog thought in its anti-male nature.

How have schools changed in the last generation? They've taken on the character of female culture. All behaviour which would typically be ascribed to girls is considered acceptable and proper. The behaviour you would have expected to find in boys is derided as obnoxious, dangerous, and ill-suited to schools. The result is girls ta all levels of academia are thriving and boys at all levels of academia are doing poorly.

This carries that into work behaviour. Female approved behaviour is mandatory. Anything that might be associated with typical male behaviour is frowned on if not outright banned. And no, I'm not talking about groping someone or taking out Mister Winkee to show the girl in the next cubicle over.

They is much "anti-male" literature available in attempt to understand the male dominated workspace in executive jobs.

There is nothing incorrect about enhancing and educating "girl behavior" to boys while everyone recognize what is undesirable behavior in the workplace.  However, all the current misconduct allegations are levied on men in power by both men and women.  Some allegations happened decades ago however misconduct revelation is making an impact now(some people question why now).  Maybe social media makes it easy to say metoo, maybe because women enrage that men want to deny bad behavior 40 years ago (they are not fired) or women are satisfied  when men they are regretful and admit bad behavior is wrong (most of the men are getting fired) finally some standard.  Whose next,  accusations has flu like symptoms - it spreads and the season is not over.  

It is not about a failure to communicate between men and women in the workspace, it's about wanting to get ahead, and the discrepancies women they face to get there.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, RB said:

There is nothing incorrect about enhancing and educating "girl behavior" to boys while everyone recognize what is undesirable behavior in the workplace

Nothing bad about changing the educational climate so that girls thrive and boys fail?

Quote

.  However, all the current misconduct allegations are levied on men in power by both men and women. 

Because until recently men were the only ones with power.

Quote

Maybe social media makes it easy to say metoo, maybe because women enrage that men want to deny bad behavior 40 years ago (they are not fired) or women are satisfied  when men they are regretful and admit bad behavior is wrong (most of the men are getting fired) finally some standard.  Whose next,  accusations has flu like symptoms - it spreads and the season is not over.  

It is not about a failure to communicate between men and women in the workspace, it's about wanting to get ahead, and the discrepancies women they face to get there.

It is about castigating male behavior based on instinctive sexual interest in females as inappropriate and unacceptable, regardless of whether there is abuse or harassment while ignoring female behavior based on instinctive sexual interest in men. How many of these female media and Hollywood people used their sexual attractiveness as a weapon to get parts, to get jobs, to get ahead? From common knowledge, LOTS. How many women use their attractiveness in the workplace to get ahead? From common knowledge, not lots, but certainly more than a few. Male behavior is severely punished while female behavior is only, at most, frowned on. And note again I'm not talking about the predatory Weinsteins of the world.

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.

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, 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.

The reason why certain looks are in fashion might be because it is thought to be attractive to the opposite sex, but the reason that many women feel like they ought to dress that way is not to attract men, but to maintain status among their fellow women. I constantly hear women commenting on how other women are dressed and even judging them for how they are dressed, sometimes quite harshly. I almost never hear men say anything about how women are dressed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Bonam said:

The reason why certain looks are in fashion might be because it is thought to be attractive to the opposite sex, but the reason that many women feel like they ought to dress that way is not to attract men, but to maintain status among their fellow women. I constantly hear women commenting on how other women are dressed and even judging them for how they are dressed, sometimes quite harshly. I almost never hear men say anything about how women are dressed. 

As I said, that's the culture. And women are in competition - for men. Twas ever thus.  So even if a woman is happily attached and not looking for another guy she's still instinctively in competition with other women. Our culture pushes the constant theme that your value as a woman is dependent on how hot you are. They might not explicitly say 'to men' but that's the truth of it. Women have sexual power and have been told the hotter they are the more sexual power they possesses. Compare male and female clothing, whether its formal or informal. Both are designed to clothe the man and unclothe the woman. Compare mens shorts with womens shorts, men's suits with women's formal or club dresses, mens bathing suits with women's, men' s exercise attire with women's. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Argus

Still majority of executive jobs are held by men.
When you compare happily attached to women (out of bounds) to women who pout their prowess (out of bounds or not) trying to get contracts and to get ahead in business, it is more difficult, and takes long to secure contracts when perceived as out of bounds.  I rather put on my lipstick and high heels if it makes life easy. 

With more women at the top, there will come change.  Indeed a welcome change to wear flats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RB said:

Still majority of executive jobs are held by men.
When you compare happily attached to women (out of bounds) to women who pout their prowess (out of bounds or not) trying to get contracts and to get ahead in business, it is more difficult, and takes long to secure contracts when perceived as out of bounds.  I rather put on my lipstick and high heels if it makes life easy. 

With more women at the top, there will come change.  Indeed a welcome change to wear flats.

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. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...