8 ms·

We Still Let Harassers Participate in Our Community

32 points by fortawesome 11y ago

mkaziz 11y ago
Reading this made me really sad. The organization's response was straight up unjust. They should've ejected the male speaker and prevented him from attending the conference at all.
- bro-stick 11y ago
  More often than not, organizers don't care enough about doing right and instead do what is expedient because "they don't have the time to investigate or take sides." It's real evil and wrong, but it's fairly common. If organizers don't step up, crucifying them and perps in the media is another way to go. IANAL but in this instance, the victim may persue criminal sexual harassment charges if statue of limitations have not all expired and a permanent restraining order should be sought to end unwanted attention.
  - hoopd 11y ago
    You're bieng more of a bully than the author's harasser. Look at your language, you want to crucify people because they didn't destroy somebody's reputation and possibly their entire career when a member of your group asked them to? That's scary.
    - Asbostos 11y ago
      Are you saying that people whose career or reputation depends on not harassing women should be allowed to get away with harassing women more than others? A great example of the right way to do things is how the BBC kicked out their biggest star, Jeremy Clarkson, due to a single case of assault when the victim didn't even make a complaint. It shows that they don't give license to abuse people to the more valuable employees.
      - DanBC 11y ago
        In any other industry Clarkson would have been fired for gross misconduct. The BBC did not fire Clarkson. They declined to renew his contract. The BBC have said that they expect to see Clarkson on the BBC again. He was booked to appear on a panel show, but chose to pull out after public backlash. The way the BBC handled Clarkson - a drunk bully - was terrible.
      - hoopd 11y ago
        > Are you saying that people whose career or reputation depends on not harassing women should be allowed to get away with harassing women more than others? Not at all. I'm saying the only evidence provided from the author is a flirtatious text where the "harasser" was attempting to engage in consentual intercourse with another adult. Was it inappropriate? Apparently, but reaching out for human contact is a normal and healthy part of life. The person I was responding to was fantasizing about destroying this person's livelihood and the livelihoods of others who refused to take part in this destruction. One person fantasized about a natural and healthy human activity and the other fantasized about crucifiction. There may have been some vague power dynamics in the (alleged) harassment but that doesn't measure up to active and aggressive threats. The Clarkson sacking was the result of a police investigation and regardless of whether the ass-kicking was deserved or not there was a physical assault with evidence that it happened. Why we would even compare a woman having to say no in a clear and adult way to a man being physically assaulted is beyond me.
  - lazzlazzlazz 11y ago
    I'm stunned you described their choice as "real evil and wrong". You don't understand the meaning of that phrase.
ggchappell 11y ago
A worthy post.
sunir 11y ago
What is the right protocol? As a conference organizer I would like advice. Getting past he said she said is a delicate problem.
- prolways 11y ago
  It seems like in this case there is relatively objective evidence. I agree this is super tricky, but I don't think it has much to do with "he said she said". I believe the core issue here is that the bad actor has so much clout he cannot be held accountable by anyone involved. I would expect the problem to generalize to way more than just conferences.
  - sunir 11y ago
    This case seems very clear but what is the more general protocol?
    - prolways 11y ago
      I'm not sure there is much the conference can really do, especially without risking the same backlash against our author that she is trying to avoid by not exposing him. It’s possible the conference organizers are simply unjust or don’t understand, but we should consider why, in this particular example, the conference may have had to be unjust. What if cancelling this speaker would be so detrimental it would stop the conference? As an organizer, what would you do? In a situation like this, especially if some money has been collected and things like that, the organizers may not be allowed to make such a significant change due to competing obligations from the people who paid. Even if they could evict him, how would the conference describe his removal? Couldn't this description cause the same backlash that's keeping our author from exposing him herself? One question that’s on my mind is: is there anything criminal in his conduct? Could our author get a restraining order against the guy? Maybe our author can get the restraining order against the man, and then just go to the conference and call the police to remove him. That's my best attempt at a fair solution, but do keep in mind it would involve blind-siding the conference with the loss of a speaker. This might be necessary, as it seems the conference doesn't have the power to stop this guy without their hand being forced in this way. Also, I don't really know enough about law to say this plan is remotely feasible, but it’s the best I can come up with.
LeHatBad 11y ago
So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did finally realize her mistake: > I now understand how wrong this dynamic is. And responded as she should have first. With the result that he stopped pestering her: > We haven’t spoken for over a year, as the last time I saw him I finally had the courage and support system to be direct, cold, and tell him to leave me alone. In my book, the guy's a bit of a thickie and a more than a little creepy. Eww. But she, by her explicit admission, did not let him know his advances were unwanted in a "direct, cold" way because SHE HOPED TO GAIN FINANCIALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY BY DOING SO. In a nutshell: He clumsily tried to get laid and she strung him along for what she could get out of him. Eww. Running book on how long that post stays up before she edits it.
- Frondo 11y ago
  She turned him down, and you're saying she didn't turn him down firmly enough, and did so to string him along? Why does that sound like a variation on "she was asking for it, she didn't fight back hard enough" or any other kind of victim-blaming?
  - meric 11y ago
    Putting aside everything else on the blog post, because the conference organisers seem inept - As long there are "wanted advances" in workplaces, there will be "unwanted advances" also. To eliminate "unwanted advances", you must eliminate "advances" in general. For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. As long as "advances" are still permitted in the workplace, there needs to be social education in the corporate environment so that "brush-offs" aren't interpreted as "try harder".
    - Retra 11y ago
      >For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. You don't know that. It is an unreasonable and unfair assumption, and reflects the expectation of your own immaturity as a gold standard.
kelukelugames 11y ago
Moral of the story is HR is useless. They are not here to make you feel more comfortable. They are here to make sure nothing bad happens to the company.

32 points by fortawesome 11y ago

Reading this made me really sad. The organization's response was straight up unjust. They should've ejected the male speaker and prevented him from attending the conference at all.

bro-stick 11y ago
More often than not, organizers don't care enough about doing right and instead do what is expedient because "they don't have the time to investigate or take sides." It's real evil and wrong, but it's fairly common. If organizers don't step up, crucifying them and perps in the media is another way to go. IANAL but in this instance, the victim may persue criminal sexual harassment charges if statue of limitations have not all expired and a permanent restraining order should be sought to end unwanted attention.
- hoopd 11y ago
  You're bieng more of a bully than the author's harasser. Look at your language, you want to crucify people because they didn't destroy somebody's reputation and possibly their entire career when a member of your group asked them to? That's scary.
  - Asbostos 11y ago
    Are you saying that people whose career or reputation depends on not harassing women should be allowed to get away with harassing women more than others? A great example of the right way to do things is how the BBC kicked out their biggest star, Jeremy Clarkson, due to a single case of assault when the victim didn't even make a complaint. It shows that they don't give license to abuse people to the more valuable employees.
    - DanBC 11y ago
      In any other industry Clarkson would have been fired for gross misconduct. The BBC did not fire Clarkson. They declined to renew his contract. The BBC have said that they expect to see Clarkson on the BBC again. He was booked to appear on a panel show, but chose to pull out after public backlash. The way the BBC handled Clarkson - a drunk bully - was terrible.
    - hoopd 11y ago
      > Are you saying that people whose career or reputation depends on not harassing women should be allowed to get away with harassing women more than others? Not at all. I'm saying the only evidence provided from the author is a flirtatious text where the "harasser" was attempting to engage in consentual intercourse with another adult. Was it inappropriate? Apparently, but reaching out for human contact is a normal and healthy part of life. The person I was responding to was fantasizing about destroying this person's livelihood and the livelihoods of others who refused to take part in this destruction. One person fantasized about a natural and healthy human activity and the other fantasized about crucifiction. There may have been some vague power dynamics in the (alleged) harassment but that doesn't measure up to active and aggressive threats. The Clarkson sacking was the result of a police investigation and regardless of whether the ass-kicking was deserved or not there was a physical assault with evidence that it happened. Why we would even compare a woman having to say no in a clear and adult way to a man being physically assaulted is beyond me.
- lazzlazzlazz 11y ago
  I'm stunned you described their choice as "real evil and wrong". You don't understand the meaning of that phrase.

ggchappell 11y ago

A worthy post.

sunir 11y ago

What is the right protocol? As a conference organizer I would like advice. Getting past he said she said is a delicate problem.

prolways 11y ago
It seems like in this case there is relatively objective evidence. I agree this is super tricky, but I don't think it has much to do with "he said she said". I believe the core issue here is that the bad actor has so much clout he cannot be held accountable by anyone involved. I would expect the problem to generalize to way more than just conferences.
- sunir 11y ago
  This case seems very clear but what is the more general protocol?
  - prolways 11y ago
    I'm not sure there is much the conference can really do, especially without risking the same backlash against our author that she is trying to avoid by not exposing him. It’s possible the conference organizers are simply unjust or don’t understand, but we should consider why, in this particular example, the conference may have had to be unjust. What if cancelling this speaker would be so detrimental it would stop the conference? As an organizer, what would you do? In a situation like this, especially if some money has been collected and things like that, the organizers may not be allowed to make such a significant change due to competing obligations from the people who paid. Even if they could evict him, how would the conference describe his removal? Couldn't this description cause the same backlash that's keeping our author from exposing him herself? One question that’s on my mind is: is there anything criminal in his conduct? Could our author get a restraining order against the guy? Maybe our author can get the restraining order against the man, and then just go to the conference and call the police to remove him. That's my best attempt at a fair solution, but do keep in mind it would involve blind-siding the conference with the loss of a speaker. This might be necessary, as it seems the conference doesn't have the power to stop this guy without their hand being forced in this way. Also, I don't really know enough about law to say this plan is remotely feasible, but it’s the best I can come up with.

LeHatBad 11y ago

So: In the writer's own words, she did not respond honestly to his advances as she hoped to advance her career through his acquaintance: > While I tried to politely decline his advances, he was in a position of power over me in this industry. He said he knew my bosses, he knew where I worked, and he promised he’d help advance my career. I felt it best to stay in his “good graces” and not be flat out rude. She did finally realize her mistake: > I now understand how wrong this dynamic is. And responded as she should have first. With the result that he stopped pestering her: > We haven’t spoken for over a year, as the last time I saw him I finally had the courage and support system to be direct, cold, and tell him to leave me alone. In my book, the guy's a bit of a thickie and a more than a little creepy. Eww. But she, by her explicit admission, did not let him know his advances were unwanted in a "direct, cold" way because SHE HOPED TO GAIN FINANCIALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY BY DOING SO. In a nutshell: He clumsily tried to get laid and she strung him along for what she could get out of him. Eww. Running book on how long that post stays up before she edits it.

Frondo 11y ago
She turned him down, and you're saying she didn't turn him down firmly enough, and did so to string him along? Why does that sound like a variation on "she was asking for it, she didn't fight back hard enough" or any other kind of victim-blaming?
- meric 11y ago
  Putting aside everything else on the blog post, because the conference organisers seem inept - As long there are "wanted advances" in workplaces, there will be "unwanted advances" also. To eliminate "unwanted advances", you must eliminate "advances" in general. For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. As long as "advances" are still permitted in the workplace, there needs to be social education in the corporate environment so that "brush-offs" aren't interpreted as "try harder".
  - Retra 11y ago
    >For example: if she found him hot, we wouldn't be reading this post. You don't know that. It is an unreasonable and unfair assumption, and reflects the expectation of your own immaturity as a gold standard.

kelukelugames 11y ago

Moral of the story is HR is useless. They are not here to make you feel more comfortable. They are here to make sure nothing bad happens to the company.