7 ms·
A lot of people here seem to not understand the power imbalance point, so I'd like to explain it. Imagine you're in these positions: --Being arrested, and an o
by alexandercrohde 9y ago
A lot of people here seem to not understand the power imbalance point, so I'd like to explain it.
Imagine you're in these positions:
--Being arrested, and an officer makes a romantic advance
--On trial, and the judge makes a romantic advance
--In therapy, and the therapist makes a romantic advance
--At the doctor, and the doctor makes a romantic advance
--At the bank, and the banker makes a romantic advance
--In a restaurant, and the waiter makes a romantic advance
--At work, and the cleaning staff makes a romantic advance
--In class, and the teacher makes a romantic advance
--Buying a car, and the car dealer makes a romantic advance
Obviously each of these situations is a little different, and the appropriateness of flirting in each situation is a little bit different (for example a therapist will lose the ability to practice for life if they date a client, e.g. Dr. Phil).
When you consider why some of these are obviously wrong (cop, judge, therapist, teacher) it's because the individual in question has a responsibility to make a neutral judgement call that will have a meaningful impact on your life.
Now I'm not saying I have the answer to this, but I think we need to begin the discussion by establishing some principles.
- Xunxi 9y agoIts only a problem if the other party is not into you, figuring out the ends sorts out the means. There have also been instances where the other party recoils and indicts the proposal. It is the reality of life even though some might disagree. Nonetheless, workplace relationship is emotionally dicey and avoiding it is a safer bet.
- arkades 9y ago> Its only a problem if the other party is not into you, You're part of the problem.
- treehau5 9y agoThis is a useless reply, and it has become pervasive. Technically anyone not a part of the solution is part of the problem. Instead maybe clarify on what you find objectionable to help everyone out, including parent.
- masondixon 9y agoWelcome to the progressive left...
- dang 9y agoWould you please not make this place even worse by adding gratuitous partisan slights to what is already a flamewar?
- macspoofing 9y agoIn what way is OP 'part of the problem'? If the other party wishes to also pursue a romantic relationship - what's the problem?
- alexandercrohde 9y agoI can't speak for OP, but let me ask you this. Suppose your sister is in the back of a police vehicle, on her way to jail. Would you rather the cop who is driving that vehicle be told A) It's okay to flirt with suspects/criminals if they are into you B) It's never okay to flirt with suspects/criminals and you will lose your job if you do ?
- throwawayawaya 9y agoObviously the second.
- masondixon 9y agoIf its your sister, if the police flirt with her, she will probably have an easier time in jail, maybe able to get preferential treatment. Good if you are the guilty criminal. So A. If she is a suspect, then she would feel pressured to go along with the police's advances, because of the risk of retaliation for knocking back advances. So, B. But for the victim of your sister's crime, she will want justice to be served, and will definitely go for B.
- LightskinKanye 9y agoIf passing on my genes might mean I am a creep, I'll take the risk. The risk/reward ratio just really isn't in favor of being the nice guy.
- escapetech 9y agoIt's not necessarily about power imbalances - subordinates might express interest in a superior, or a colleague might interest in another colleague, and both situations can be just as problematic as a superior expressing interest in a subordinate. The problem is simply one person deciding to single out another person for any deviation of expected treatment especially when it has no relation to the social context or work performance/duties. Hitting on a coworker is potentially as problematic as inviting a coworker to church. Being extra friendly to a coworker or customer of a different gender is just as problematic as being nasty and disrespectful to a coworker or client of a different ethnicity. Every scenario mentioned is grounds for making the person or possibly even those next to the person uncomfortable, leading to harassment claims. Furthermore, the idea of only behaving a certain way if the other party consents is a lack of principle. It potentially jeopardizes the protections a workplace is supposed to provide to all workers and customers. Just because a door is left open does not mean one should enter.
- alexandercrohde 9y agoI don't think dating coworkers is wrong. I think making somebody uncomfortable with clumsy/forceful/persistent advances can be bad though. But let's say you like somebody at work, so you talk to them, and you both enjoy the conversation. Then you eat lunch together at work a few times. Then you invite them to get drinks after work as a group. Then you continue to hang out when the rest of the group has gone home. Then you ask if this person would be interested in getting drinks in the future. If anybody has a problem with that I don't see why. So again key differences: - Power imbalance - Advances on the first time you meet somebody (no evidence of reciprocity) - Advances during the job - How aggressive the advance is (a compliment? touching? inviting to a date? lewd comment?)
- shams93 9y agoWe need to legalize prostitution so that an investor or manager who has these fantasies can play them out with professional help. If we viewed prostitutes as a form of health therapist and gave them professional respect rather than keeping them in the black market a lot of these guys could work out their power issues with a trained sex professional instead of creating these nightmares for innocent women who just want to do a great job or run a successful startup.
- fatbird 9y agoYou're assuming these guys see this as a problem. I suspect for most of them, the power issues are, erotically, the whole point. Why patronize a prostitute for make believe alpha male abuse of one's position when one has the real thing every day?
- dllthomas 9y ago> Why patronize a prostitute for make believe alpha male abuse of one's position when one has the real thing every day? Because it's a lot less likely to get you in trouble (if we make it a lot less likely to get you in trouble).
- fatbird 9y agoGiven the frequency with which VCs have gotten in trouble for this before this week, that doesn't seem like an important consideration.
- edanm 9y agoAnother perspective - the reason some of the situations above are inappropriate is not about the impact on you. Rather, it's because some of the examples are situations where you are forced by law to interact with those people, and have no alternative. From my "libertarian" perspective, the situation with the police officer, judge at a trial, the teacher, and probably the doctor are clearly the most offensive, because the state gives them tons of power over me without me being able to get out of it. (The doctor situation is kind of dependent on how healthcare works in your country). The other examples are less clear cut. A waiter hitting on someone - no problem IMO (usual caveat here - it's still bad if persistent after rejection, done with pressure, etc). At work with co-workers - generally ok assuming it's done in a non-pressuring way, and there's no power imbalance (which wouldn't make it not-ok necessarily, again, depends on the situation). Car dealer - no problem.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- rmc 9y ago> it's because the individual in question has a responsibility to make a neutral judgement call that will have a meaningful impact on your life. The other reason: Sometimes an issue goes your way when you sleep with the powerful person. A cop decides to let you away with a warning, a boss gives you the job, the bank manager grants the loan/mortgage, the teacher gives you a good grade. (And conversely, you can be punished if you don't sleep with them) If we want a real meritocracy, we need to stop flirting in the office.