3 ms·

When these reports about sexual harassment are so vague about what actually happened it does a disservice to everyone. How is anyone supposed to know where the

When these reports about sexual harassment are so vague about what actually happened it does a disservice to everyone. How is anyone supposed to know where the line is between hitting on someone and sexual harassment? Many women like to play hard to get. Many men out there are just plain dumb when it comes to how they show their interest in a woman, not malicious. With more specifics they'd be able to learn what's right and what's not.

tosskey123 9y ago
Is that you Dave?
nl 9y ago
I assume you actually realise why they are vague, but in case you don't: it's polite. Many victims find it humiliating to talk about, and adding details often adds to this humiliation. In this case many details were published elsewhere already, in enough detail to offer little excuse.
- gduncan12 9y ago
  Was the victim(s) identified? If not, then we should be free to talk about the specifics without making any identifications. Again, there's no details to go on here.
  - nl 9y ago
    Was the victim(s) identified? Yes, in the other coverage.
crawfordcomeaux 9y ago
Perhaps by first developing some level of intimacy & emotional connection in a platonic context, being a supportive whole human being with well-defined/practiced/communicated boundaries, and occasionally having a meta discussion about the relationship to get on the same page? I don't need specifics since hitting on someone is a suboptimal strategy for connection. If you're just looking to get laid, try it out and let me know how it works for that.
LarryPage 9y ago
Saying "I wasn't sure whether to hire you or hit on you" is fucked up if you're in a position to hire that person. What the actual fuck.
- gduncan12 9y ago
  Raping someone is fucked up. I don't see how that sentence is fucked up. If someone said that to me, I would take it as a compliment. To me it says not only are you smart enough to be hired, you're also attractive. Is it better to split it up into two separate sentences? Obviously the guy is hitting on her, if she's not interested then that's fine. I really don't see the problem, could someone please explain?
  - michaelf 9y ago
    Seriously, I think "Always Sunny" explains it best (i.e., because of "the implication") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE
    - lovehashbrowns 9y ago
      Yeah, I immediately thought of that video when I was considering the massive power imbalance at play here. You can re-word most of Dennis' dialogue to fit the situation, too. "The implication that [she won't get an investment] if she refuses to sleep with me." The last part of that clip is especially applicable. The other commenter sees this as a compliment. "She's attractive; of course she'd get hit on!" But it's a "compliment" with an asterisk attached to it, and the subtext is a massive power imbalance.
    - hueving 9y ago
      Is it really productive to compare this situation to an implication of life-threatening violence?
  - mturmon 9y ago
    If you happen to work in California, you should study the law better before you consider a supervisory position. This style of advance is black-letter sexual harassment in California, if done by a supervisor to an employee in their organization. (This wasn't the precise case here, but it was very close, and your wording seems to take in cases beyond this particular scenario.) If these advances continued, it is easy grounds for a lawsuit.

tosskey123 9y ago

Is that you Dave?

nl 9y ago

I assume you actually realise why they are vague, but in case you don't: it's polite. Many victims find it humiliating to talk about, and adding details often adds to this humiliation. In this case many details were published elsewhere already, in enough detail to offer little excuse.

gduncan12 9y ago
Was the victim(s) identified? If not, then we should be free to talk about the specifics without making any identifications. Again, there's no details to go on here.
- nl 9y ago
  Was the victim(s) identified? Yes, in the other coverage.

crawfordcomeaux 9y ago

Perhaps by first developing some level of intimacy & emotional connection in a platonic context, being a supportive whole human being with well-defined/practiced/communicated boundaries, and occasionally having a meta discussion about the relationship to get on the same page? I don't need specifics since hitting on someone is a suboptimal strategy for connection. If you're just looking to get laid, try it out and let me know how it works for that.

LarryPage 9y ago

Saying "I wasn't sure whether to hire you or hit on you" is fucked up if you're in a position to hire that person. What the actual fuck.

gduncan12 9y ago
Raping someone is fucked up. I don't see how that sentence is fucked up. If someone said that to me, I would take it as a compliment. To me it says not only are you smart enough to be hired, you're also attractive. Is it better to split it up into two separate sentences? Obviously the guy is hitting on her, if she's not interested then that's fine. I really don't see the problem, could someone please explain?
- michaelf 9y ago
  Seriously, I think "Always Sunny" explains it best (i.e., because of "the implication") https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-yUafzOXHPE
  - lovehashbrowns 9y ago
    Yeah, I immediately thought of that video when I was considering the massive power imbalance at play here. You can re-word most of Dennis' dialogue to fit the situation, too. "The implication that [she won't get an investment] if she refuses to sleep with me." The last part of that clip is especially applicable. The other commenter sees this as a compliment. "She's attractive; of course she'd get hit on!" But it's a "compliment" with an asterisk attached to it, and the subtext is a massive power imbalance.
  - hueving 9y ago
    Is it really productive to compare this situation to an implication of life-threatening violence?
- mturmon 9y ago
  If you happen to work in California, you should study the law better before you consider a supervisory position. This style of advance is black-letter sexual harassment in California, if done by a supervisor to an employee in their organization. (This wasn't the precise case here, but it was very close, and your wording seems to take in cases beyond this particular scenario.) If these advances continued, it is easy grounds for a lawsuit.