8 ms·

Men at Work Wonder If They Overstepped with Women, Too

43 points by sillypuddy 9y ago

jacalata 9y ago
The amount of hysteria on display by men in this article and elsewhere is ridiculous. What happened to the skeptical "treat each person as an individual" attitude that created "Not All Men"?
- mistermann 9y ago
  Ridiculous until you wake up one day and discover you no longer have a career.
  - jacalata 9y ago
    The occasional occurrence of an unlikely event does not make it reasonable to arrange your life around avoiding it. See: kidnapping by a stranger, plane crashes, suddenly having a photo of yourself go viral on the internet.
    - mistermann 9y ago
      > occasional occurrence My reading of the newspaper suggests otherwise.
      - jacalata 9y ago
        Your newspaper is reporting many instances of men with their career ruined by a false accusation? Those stories don't seem to make it to the New York Times, perhaps you should diversify your sources.
- mirimir 9y ago
  Are you saying "hysteria" ironically? But seriously, things are getting hugely chaotic. The only safe bet is keeping sexuality totally out of the workplace. But that doesn't mean isolation. As you say, you treat everyone the same. Because you really have no clue about their sexual orientation or status, issues, vulnerability, and so on.
  - jacalata 9y ago
    Yes, I couldn't resist.
  - tabeth 9y ago
    Why wouldn't you treat everyone the same?
    - flukus 9y ago
      Because half the population (or at least a considerable portion of that half) get's offended if I treat them the same as I would men.
      - mirimir 9y ago
        For sure. My wife swears like a sailor now, but she still gets offended sometimes by my repertoire ;) And we've been married for decades. But there's a certain blend of formality and good cheer that's part of professional behavior. Edit: My point is that I'd never talk that way in a professional context. Or even on HN. Edit: Also that my wife has picked up bad habits from me.
      - jacalata 9y ago
        I am skeptical that there is anything you could do that would never offend any men but would offend a significant percentage of women. Even more skeptical if we're restricting the scene to professional interactions.
        flukus 9y ago
        I didn't say it would never offend men, but take a dirty joke as an example, it might offend men, but I'm drastically less likely to be written up by HR if a man is offended. Another one is the level of profanity that the different sexes are comfortable with. Another one would be making fun of someone's clothing, perfectly acceptable amongst friends. > Even more skeptical if we're restricting the scene to professional interactions. Not everything in the workplace is a professional interaction, or at least it never used to be. I don't know what it's supposed to be now, you have corporate wanting to do team building exercises and everyone to be one big family, we're still supposed to sign birthday cards and that sort of rubbish, yet you can't talk to people as you would friends and family.
porfirium 9y ago
All these incidents will end up causing segregation and unwillingness to hire/work with women.
- allhailkatt 9y ago
  I'm guessing it's going to create power differences, where those willing to deal with social complexity will end up on top. The more people you can talk to, the better your career will do. Much like any game of Settlers of Catan. These incidents have been pushed against for a while, and while the same rhetoric was used in the 70's, nonetheless here we are without gendered want ads.
  - wahern 9y ago
    > where those willing to deal with social complexity will > end up on top You could also draw the opposite conclusion: bullies and predators like Harvey Weinstein are more successful on average preciously because they're less risk averse and less inhibited when leveraging their power. The #MeToo campaign doesn't change that dynamic much, especially at the extreme where you find abusers. The consequences come, if at all, long after the reward. This doesn't just apply to sexual harassment. Sexual harassers are adept at wielding their power, which is an incredibly useful skill in any field. Very often that translates into socially aggressive behavior, even if it doesn't escalate to anything technically improper.[1] If the consequences aren't swift and transparent, theoretically we just end up evolving more skillful harassers and/or culling the aggressive non-harassers. Just another way of looking at things. I wouldn't premise any real decisions on such a theory, but it's something I wonder about, at least in the business context. I mean, there's a reason success in business and politics correlates so strongly with so-called psychopathic character traits. [1] What immediately comes to mind is that hilarious scene in Along Came Polly where Alec Baldwin violates almost every imaginable aspect of bathroom etiquette as part of a not-so-subtle dominance display: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHApjKcZAgI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHApjKcZAgI Because powerful people cross these boundaries so much, you can literally signify power by exaggerating this sort of behavior. See, e.g., the above hilarious clip (because comedy is funnier when it's rooted in shared experience) and Donald Trump (from the truth is stranger than fiction department). In fact, I suspect that it's precisely because we (both men and women) are so used to powerful people crossing these boundaries that women find themselves in difficult situations where the nominal boundary had long been crossed yet they were nonetheless dazed by the turn to more sexually aggressive behavior.
tabeth 9y ago
I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about? Is it that difficult to just treat women -- not nicely -- but equally? This is kindergarten level stuff, people. Keep your hands to yourself, be nice, don't ask overly personal questions about people unless they share first, etc. I guarantee anyone reading this that if they just reflect behavior they'll be fine. This means if someone shares something moderately personal, do the same. If someone laughs, laugh back. To mimic behavior is to be human. Be human.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  No it's not but it's hard for the hysteria to settle and thus a lot of men will be wrongfully accused.
  - neom 9y ago
    Wrongfully accused of what? OP literally described how not to be accused of anything 101. Treat women like your fellow man, treat women like humans.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      I know what OP is describing and I am saying that that's not enough as there are difference of opinion with regards to what that means. For some saying sweetie is sexual abuse.
      - tabeth 9y ago
        I'm curious: would you call a man sweetie?
        ThomPete 9y ago
        No just like I wouldn't call a girl bro or dude or m8. I see no issue in saying that to someone and have never had any problems saying it to the women I have been working with or know. I am well aware of when to do that and when to not. Yet now it's suddenly become an issue because some consider it sexual abuse.
rhelmer 9y ago
I'm not sure why this is hard... why is any amount of flirting, or innuendo etc. at work OK? I do realize that people spend much of their time at work, and it's a place people meet. Personally, now that we have dating sites and such I would not risk my career by trying to initiate a relationship with someone I am working with... I'd rather avoid even just the mild awkwardness of someone being uncomfortable at me asking them for coffee or dinner, and having to then work with them after that.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  It's not that simple. This isn't just some trend which can be fixed with a little logic. This is something that is changing the discussion fundamentally turning men guilty by default. The metoo campaign IM basically allowed anything from actual abuse to catcalling be called sexual abuse. It expanded the definition of sexual abuse to basically align with only the most extreme feminists. Men are now by definition guilty and any attempt at bringing nuance to the discussion will mark you as a possible perpetrator yourself.
  - xionon 9y ago
    > The metoo campaign IM basically allowed anything from actual abuse to catcalling be called sexual abuse. It expanded the definition of sexual abuse to basically align with only the most extreme feminists. Are you implying that catcalling someone, in or out of the workplace, should not be considered sexual abuse?
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      I am saying that there is a context to these kind of social dynamics which can't just be considered binary. It depends on the situation. All that get's lost in the panic.
      - rhelmer 9y ago
        Catcalling just seems like a bad example... I can't think of a situation where that seems appropriate? I'm really not seeing why any of this belongs in the workplace. Why not bars, or if you're not the nightlife type, dating sites?
adriand 9y ago
I've been an owner of a company for years now and I've always followed a few simple rules with the women who work for our company: - I never, ever comment on their appearance, including new hairstyles, clothing, etc. - I refer to them as "women", never as "ladies" or "girls" or other nonsense. - No touching (hugs, etc.) with the exception of handshakes and high fives. - I don't engage in, or tolerate, any sexist, sexual or otherwise inappropriate conversations. I will, however, happily go for lunch, have a drink, etc., as I would any other colleague. Incidentally I regularly break some of these rules with male employees, such as remarking on haircuts ("looking good", etc.), but it's different. (I maintain the rule about sexist/sexual conversations across the board - talking about women with male colleagues isn't cool either.) I could probably break some of these rules with some of the women in my office without causing offence too, especially the people I'm closer with - e.g. by remarking on a new outfit or something - but I don't want to be a creep so I just play it super safe with everybody. It's really not all that difficult: be a professional, don't be a creep, and err on the side of caution. If you have to overcompensate like Pence, it's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative.
- xupybd 9y ago
  >If you have to overcompensate like Pence, it's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative. I kind of think Pence is being smart. Conservative politicians can't survive that sort of scandal so being really careful can't hurt. Also I think there is some wisdom in not always trusting yourself not to cross the line, why not just keep your self as far away from the line as you can reasonably maintain. Kinda like ulysses tied to the mast, it's just safer that way.
  - BEEdwards 9y ago
    >Conservative politicians can't survive that sort of scandal so being really careful can't hurt. Roy Moore would love to talk to you. Or more specifically your daughter if she's around... *Moore is know for dating underage girls and has been for a long time, yet it didn't hurt his political career. You can downvote, but the fact is conservatives only pay lip service to caring about morality. http://www.businessinsider.com/roy-moore-former-colleague-common-knowledge-hedated-high-school-girls-2017-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/roy-moore-former-colleague-co...
debacle 9y ago
I've overstepped with women. Women have overstepped with me. There is definitely a graciously wide gray area of "That came out differently than I meant it." The key is to: 1. Understand your own intent when saying/doing something. 2. Consider the potential negative ways something you may say could be perceived. 3. Understand the additional social responsibility that comes with being someone's superior, explicit or implicit.
- T2_t2 9y ago
  4. Hope no one takes further something that is a misunderstanding? I dunno where we are going here, and I'm not sure all this stuff isn't confirming the exact opposite of everything people are hoping for. I'm not sure why the next Harvey Weinstein won't act the exact same way ("You mean, I get to sleep with beautiful women for 30 years and then get outed worth 100s of millions? That's seems like a great deal") I don't think anyone has any idea how this will shake out, but I won't be shocked if it is a bad outcome all around - from reduced funding for female startups to less mentoring to more gender apartheid in workplaces, to China's inevitable rise to world's largest economy and most influential country.
  - debacle 9y ago
    I had an edit where I added: 4. Treat people like individuals. But I didn't want to needlessly extend the list, even though that's the most important advice you could give anyone about interacting with anyone else. Most people who commit sexual harassment aren't Harvey Weinstein. Most flirting is innocent, and in my experience either slightly awkward, ignored, or well received, but rarely uncomfortable. Most male/female relationships (or any relationships for that matter) in the workplace are healthy, friendly, and beneficial. There is a vast difference between inappropriate social interaction due to ignorance, and predatory social interaction due to malice.
- dognotdog 9y ago
  I can see risk of that gray area: as long as everybody is on good terms, misunderstandings and unintentional wrongdoings are quickly righted, but when either party is antagonistic, that no longer works, and things can get ugly in both directions: unintended harm as well as false accusations both have real consequences. But, human interaction will never be without ambiguity, and we cannot eliminate the risk of being misunderstood or deliberately misconstrued without (especially) marginalizing those who are at a disadvantage in the first place. I feel like this is the right way to approach things: treat everyone respectfully and responsibly, even if there's a slight risk to it. (As a strawman: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety")
simonsarris 9y ago
I think the second order effects here are under appreciated. Ponder, which of these is overstepping? * Telling someone they look good today * Telling someone a very funny, yet lewd joke that you just thought up * Inviting someone for a drink after work * Telling someone they should dress better * Telling someone they are too uptight * Telling someone that, if they were nicer, they might get ahead more * Inviting a co-worker to a party with lots of alcohol (example given in article) You might think, "This is easy, clearly XYZ above are fine whereas ABC are not or could be questionable." But here's the problem: For a man talking to a man, all of the above are just plain fine. Some may think that even in very low risk interactions, "why take the risk, if it could be misconstrued?" In a very tiny way even asking these questions opens me up to the risk of someone suggesting I'm some kind of sexist/bigot/etc, even though I'm only trying to be descriptive and not normative here, because someone may misinterpret a position here. In fact I'm sure there are plenty of people who would never comment on an article like this. But I bet they'll talk to their male co-workers about it, in private. Which is kind of the rub. The net result of this round of men-wondering-of-they-are-overstepping may be even more boys club behavior than before. How is it possible for men to treat women equally with other men, if it introduces such risk? I've seen all sorts of people advocating positions that boil down to "Don't make any friends at work, work is a place for work and nothing else." This seems like a losing strategy. Not all difficult problems have broad solutions. Sometimes, spraying a pesticide increases the level of pests. > Still, some workers said they were starting to follow “the Pence rule,” which was formerly known as the Billy Graham rule, after the evangelical preacher, but is now named for Vice President Mike Pence. Mr. Pence has said he does not eat alone with women who are not his wife or attend an event without her if alcohol will be served. Maybe it is worth noting that Women are more likely than men to endorse Mike-Pence-style inter-gender workplace norms. From the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/upshot/members-of-the-opposite-sex-at-work-gender-study.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/upshot/members-of-the-opp...
- tabeth 9y ago
  > For a man talking to a man, all of the above are just plain fine. Really? I wouldn't do most of your examples, personally. I'm curious if I'm the weird one here.
jenga22 9y ago
I am not sure why men go to happy hours with alcohol or go to social events where the chances of stepping over the line explode exponentially. Going out and hanging with your co-workers over a beer might have been a good idea six months ago but is no longer a good idea. Why? Any of those things you said or did, could be construed a million different ways. Was that one thing you said flirting? Did you say that one thing that offended someone who went thru this particular experience as a child you were unaware of? Did you talk about that actor you really liked that turned out to be a child molester today and now makes you look less than acceptable? Your past behavior carries weight today. What was once acceptable might not be today and there are consequences today. You will lose your career and job over even the faintest claim. Here is the money paragraph: > Still, some workers said they were starting to follow “the Pence rule,” which was formerly known as the Billy Graham rule, after the evangelical preacher, but is now named for Vice President Mike Pence. Mr. Pence has said he does not eat alone with women who are not his wife or attend an event without her if alcohol will be served. I would even arguing going to those "game zones" is all potentially risky behavior. I know I am not being politically correct, however just doing your job and leaving is a better solution. It is better than losing everything over it.
- Balgair 9y ago
  > You will lose your career and job over even the faintest claim. We'll see. Unfortunately, the 'track record' is not promising to those people that have accused their abusers. What has actually happened? Yes, Harv is in some deep stuff, but Kevin may slip out just fine. Donny pretty much got away scot-free. Give it time to mature, we may be disappointed to find that effectively nothing will occur. Also, going out drinking with co-workers/bosses has always been an 'eyebrow raising' idea, right? Even a beer or two has always been a point of caution. Was anyone (not in a SV-frat-house-turned-startup) under any other impression?
  - jenga22 9y ago
    Almost everyone in NYC goes out at 5 for drinks and they get shit faced. While this is great for team building, it is now not a great idea for reasons that are obvious. It is not a SV thing by any measure.
xor1 9y ago
I treat all interactions with coworkers (male or female or otherwise) as if I were under surveillance by the KGB or Stasi, and any sort of misstep would mean imprisonment or death. I also refuse to ever drink with coworkers. It's worked out so far.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
erikbye 9y ago
A woman at work constantly speaks in tones of sexual innuendo, when she comes over to someone asking for help or whatever, she leans over you and places her hand on your shoulder or thigh. As a man in today’s climate the double standard is painfully obvious. Follow her example and you’d be on your ass fast.
- colanderman 9y ago
  What double standard? If a female co-worker did that to me I'd bring it up with HR. And – I'm making the assumption that you are probably in tech and therefore probably in a male-dominated workplace – unlike a woman in your situation, you can almost certainly call out the individual in question with zero fear of consequences to your career. Without knowing specifics, my prejudice is that you are in no position to complain. (My assumptions could be wrong.)
  - erikbye 9y ago
    The double standard is that she still has her job but a man wouldn’t.
    - colanderman 9y ago
      Bullshit. Tens of thousands of men who sexually harass women get away scot-free day in day out. The men you mention lost their jobs because the women they harassed spoke out (and almost always, they did so under fear of reprisal). It didn't just "happen". Have you spoken to HR or your boss?
    - _MK_ 9y ago
      Guess whose job it is to bring it with HR and make sure they understand the double standard you see? You and everyone else you can round up that agrees with you. Make it happen like women have always had to do.
    - Kluny 9y ago
      Bring it up with HR. See what happens.
aerovistae 9y ago
I thought this was talking about the band, singers of the timeless "Land Down Under."
Mz 9y ago
I don't think it is helpful to pretend there is no gray area. Talking about how to avoid grey areas is good. Pretending they don't exist is potentially dangerous and strikes me as toxic and blamey.
- noobermin 9y ago
  I think there might be a gray area, but it's probably less broad than people make it out to be.
  - Mz 9y ago
    I have found that it is possible to entirely avoid gray areas by abiding by very strict standards that avoid any possible misinterpretation. I have also found this makes me seem cold, rejecting and unapproachable. Establishing trust is a kind of bonding process. It involves taking risks. If you put nothing on the line, you don't bond. If you are never warm, trust is unlikely. If you are ever warm, confusion about intent remains possible. I don't think I can agree with you.
    - noobermin 9y ago
      I mean, a lot of it can just be people are different and will find they need to do different things in order to interact with others successfully without problems, so if you need rules, I suppose that's just you. An aside, but regarding your "coldness." I don't think that's a problem. Most people I think even when they are "warm" aren't necessarily naive and too willing to trust although society stereotypes them that way.
      - deleted 9y ago
        [deleted]
telesilla 9y ago
20 years ago I walked into a server room where the walls sported naked/semi-naked women and the inhabiting men looked at me like I was there to take away their wall candy. I chose to leave and made another career for myself, because I was too young and afraid to stand my ground. I don't regret this, because I went on to have an amazing life, but I never again stepped foot in a room like that and I do regret never working with a massive Oracle installation or learning how to get the most out of a PERL app running on metal. I lost out, and I hate that I never had the opportunity to experience working at corporate scale. I am willing to bet those rooms still exist, but almost all of the rest of my career I've found men welcoming and courteous, the same as the women I now work with. Things have changed and they are changing for the better - this is all just part of the discussion we gotta have. It's getting better folks - the fact that women can now speak out in public means we are less scared, and we'll be able to interact more and you'll have a lot more women as company down the road. Here's an exacting analysis by the ever-helpful Dan Savage on the Louis CK incident which covers similar ground (work-related harassment and power relations): http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/10/25557816/savage-love-letter-of-the-day http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/10/25557816/savage-l...
- fencepost 9y ago
  20 years ago walking out was the right choice - not necessarily because of the blatant sexism but because of the massive glaringly obvious and uncorrected mismanagement in that particular environment. The problem was not just that there were a bunch of jerks with pinups on the walls, it's that any competent management in the late 90s should have eliminated that within the first 5 minutes of walking into that room.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    so now you are a jerk if you have pinups on the wall?
    - telesilla 9y ago
      If by "pinups" you mean centrefolds from mens magazines, it's not appropriate in any work environment without the permission of all involved. When I was 20 years old I simply did not have the courage or understanding that I might have asked them to take the posters down or find something less confronting.
throwawayn0w4y 9y ago
This situation is completely blown out of proportion and ridiculous. When you have members of the opposite sex sharing space every day, sex is a factor, and there really needs to be some amount of reality brought back into this discussion. The prevailing attitude reminds me of religious parents acting as if their teenage children are not going to have sexual relations, and refusing to educate them on sex as a result. The majority of jobs I've had exposed me to sexual harassment and assault in various forms. I've had female office managers hanging their arm around me and petting my hand while I try to eat lunch after weeks of my ignoring their verbal advances. I've had female sales women grinding their breasts against me while rinding to a company offsite team-builder in a shuttle bus. As far as I'm concerned this is par for the course when you stick women and men in the same space. I don't feel like these women crossed a line worth making a big deal about, it's not as if I was raped. They were mildly annoying, but we're adults, and I'm not deluding myself into believing we're going to be robots in a coed office without ever letting our sex enter the picture. In all my experiences, the women gave up pretty quickly. It's as if they were just going out of their way to make it blatantly obvious they were interested, because my acting aloof and ignoring their more subtle advances weren't convincing enough. They probably assumed I was being shy (quiet, introverted, software engineer). I personally feel people need to calm down a bit on this topic, and yes I'd like to see the double standard go away. Attraction happens, if people are civil about it and not too persistent, I'd rather there be a reasonable threshold of tolerance on both sides of this.
- comstock 9y ago
  Those sound like somewhat mild examples of the sort of sexual harassment many women suffer. But the behavior you describe, I would not consider acceptable. I personally would not want to work somewhere that was considered “ok” and would probably at this point mention it to the person involved, HR or their manager.
hamandcheese 9y ago
> After-work events are “the front line” when it comes to harassment, and companies want “more safety precautions” now, she said. This makes me sad. I feel like letting your guard down and getting a little wild can lead to some pretty good camaraderie and friendship.
mindvirus 9y ago
My partner is a software engineer, and she has experienced an enormous amount of inappropriate behavior - everything from "was that inappropriate, am I being too sensitive?" to a person getting fired and walked out by security for their behavior toward her (extremely justifiably). None of this has ever happened to me, though. Even in the more innocuous cases, it leads to a ton of self-doubt. Part of the problem is the volume of it - these aren't one-off instances, but repeated questioning of one's worth as a human being and member of the team. I like unconscious bias as a model for addressing this because it lets you flip the equation around on these cases. Imagine someone who tells women at work to smile. By accusing them of being sexist, the argument becomes about whether they're being sexist - and they'll inevitably argue that they're not, they're just being nice, people are being too sensitive/PC and in the end nothing happens. And it's really not the individual instance of it that's the problem, but the volume of it - and not just from that person, but from everyone. And this really serves to diffuse responsibility. Unconscious bias would say to recognize your own biases, and rather than have the argument about whether or not you're sexist/racist/whatever, to think about how you can treat people equally, and correct for your biases. And then, rather than trying to apply labels to people, we can have a real conversation about behavior - and correct ones behavior and build systems to accommodate for these biases. For example, if someone repeatedly interrupts someone in a meeting, they might not even know it (hence, _unconscious_ bias). If you accuse that person of being sexist, the conversation stops there. But if people subscribe to unconscious bias, it can be a learning experience "hey, I noticed you interrupted X a few times in that meeting" it can be a chance to understand ones biases - "oh, I didn't mean to. I'll be mindful of that in the future." And you can even go a step further, and create systems to compensate - have a rule that one person can talk at a time (say by holding a ball), or a culture where you explicitly acknowledge any ideas you're building on before you suggest something. Obviously there's no silver bullet to solving this, and there are bigger issues than people being interrupted in meetings, but I've found when people subscribe to this philosophy of self-reflection and mindfulness, it goes a long way in creating a positive environment where people are treated like people.
sp527 9y ago
This has become almost cartoonish. The people being accused of sexual harassment did overtly and obviously abusive things. That doesn’t call for a referendum on the entire scope of male-female interactions. If you have to wonder whether you’re a sexual harasser and aren’t stupid or deliberately oblivious, then the answer is you are not one. You may still be somewhere on the misogyny spectrum. You may even make women feel uncomfortable with some of the things you say and do. But the term sexual harassment should be reserved for obviously inappropriate conduct, and not be cheapened into some thin-gray-line class of transgression. Also if our society starts treating flirting with or attempting to date coworkers as problematic behavior, people will lose the opportunity to potentially find mates in an environment to which they’re devoting increasingly larger shares of their lives. The only people who will win in that scenario are the therapists.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- JBlue42 9y ago
  Yes, thank you. You pretty much echoed something John Scalzi said on his blog: https://whatever.scalzi.com/2017/11/12/a-qa-for-the-post-weinstein-era/ https://whatever.scalzi.com/2017/11/12/a-qa-for-the-post-wei... It's a bit long but worth reading. At the end: "Dudes, don’t be a harassing piece of shit, don’t accept other dudes being harassing pieces of shit, and when women (and others) tell you that someone has harassed or assaulted them, believe them."
- flukus 9y ago
  > The people being accused of sexual harassment did overtly and obviously abusive things. They were accused of doing those things, the accusations alone were enough to be career ending, that's the problem. As long as society is fine with vilifying people on accusations alone then the only defense is to not put yourself into a situation where such an accusation can be made.
  - telesilla 9y ago
    Please read the Scalzi blog post linked above: "Aside from the actual fact that a woman accusing a man of harassment has her life turned into such a shitshow that the bar for her choosing to tell her story is almost unspeakably high (and therefore not fertile ground for lying), I want you to consider a singular and depressing fact, which is that nearly every woman you know has actual dudes who’ve harassed them. They will go after them, rather than outright lying about you."
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

43 points by sillypuddy 9y ago

The amount of hysteria on display by men in this article and elsewhere is ridiculous. What happened to the skeptical "treat each person as an individual" attitude that created "Not All Men"?

mistermann 9y ago
Ridiculous until you wake up one day and discover you no longer have a career.
- jacalata 9y ago
  The occasional occurrence of an unlikely event does not make it reasonable to arrange your life around avoiding it. See: kidnapping by a stranger, plane crashes, suddenly having a photo of yourself go viral on the internet.
  - mistermann 9y ago
    > occasional occurrence My reading of the newspaper suggests otherwise.
    - jacalata 9y ago
      Your newspaper is reporting many instances of men with their career ruined by a false accusation? Those stories don't seem to make it to the New York Times, perhaps you should diversify your sources.
mirimir 9y ago
Are you saying "hysteria" ironically? But seriously, things are getting hugely chaotic. The only safe bet is keeping sexuality totally out of the workplace. But that doesn't mean isolation. As you say, you treat everyone the same. Because you really have no clue about their sexual orientation or status, issues, vulnerability, and so on.
- jacalata 9y ago
  Yes, I couldn't resist.
- tabeth 9y ago
  Why wouldn't you treat everyone the same?
  - flukus 9y ago
    Because half the population (or at least a considerable portion of that half) get's offended if I treat them the same as I would men.
    - mirimir 9y ago
      For sure. My wife swears like a sailor now, but she still gets offended sometimes by my repertoire ;) And we've been married for decades. But there's a certain blend of formality and good cheer that's part of professional behavior. Edit: My point is that I'd never talk that way in a professional context. Or even on HN. Edit: Also that my wife has picked up bad habits from me.
    - jacalata 9y ago
      I am skeptical that there is anything you could do that would never offend any men but would offend a significant percentage of women. Even more skeptical if we're restricting the scene to professional interactions.
      - flukus 9y ago
        I didn't say it would never offend men, but take a dirty joke as an example, it might offend men, but I'm drastically less likely to be written up by HR if a man is offended. Another one is the level of profanity that the different sexes are comfortable with. Another one would be making fun of someone's clothing, perfectly acceptable amongst friends. > Even more skeptical if we're restricting the scene to professional interactions. Not everything in the workplace is a professional interaction, or at least it never used to be. I don't know what it's supposed to be now, you have corporate wanting to do team building exercises and everyone to be one big family, we're still supposed to sign birthday cards and that sort of rubbish, yet you can't talk to people as you would friends and family.

porfirium 9y ago

All these incidents will end up causing segregation and unwillingness to hire/work with women.

allhailkatt 9y ago
I'm guessing it's going to create power differences, where those willing to deal with social complexity will end up on top. The more people you can talk to, the better your career will do. Much like any game of Settlers of Catan. These incidents have been pushed against for a while, and while the same rhetoric was used in the 70's, nonetheless here we are without gendered want ads.
- wahern 9y ago
  > where those willing to deal with social complexity will > end up on top You could also draw the opposite conclusion: bullies and predators like Harvey Weinstein are more successful on average preciously because they're less risk averse and less inhibited when leveraging their power. The #MeToo campaign doesn't change that dynamic much, especially at the extreme where you find abusers. The consequences come, if at all, long after the reward. This doesn't just apply to sexual harassment. Sexual harassers are adept at wielding their power, which is an incredibly useful skill in any field. Very often that translates into socially aggressive behavior, even if it doesn't escalate to anything technically improper.[1] If the consequences aren't swift and transparent, theoretically we just end up evolving more skillful harassers and/or culling the aggressive non-harassers. Just another way of looking at things. I wouldn't premise any real decisions on such a theory, but it's something I wonder about, at least in the business context. I mean, there's a reason success in business and politics correlates so strongly with so-called psychopathic character traits. [1] What immediately comes to mind is that hilarious scene in Along Came Polly where Alec Baldwin violates almost every imaginable aspect of bathroom etiquette as part of a not-so-subtle dominance display: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHApjKcZAgI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHApjKcZAgI Because powerful people cross these boundaries so much, you can literally signify power by exaggerating this sort of behavior. See, e.g., the above hilarious clip (because comedy is funnier when it's rooted in shared experience) and Donald Trump (from the truth is stranger than fiction department). In fact, I suspect that it's precisely because we (both men and women) are so used to powerful people crossing these boundaries that women find themselves in difficult situations where the nominal boundary had long been crossed yet they were nonetheless dazed by the turn to more sexually aggressive behavior.

tabeth 9y ago

I honestly don't know what all the fuss is about? Is it that difficult to just treat women -- not nicely -- but equally? This is kindergarten level stuff, people. Keep your hands to yourself, be nice, don't ask overly personal questions about people unless they share first, etc. I guarantee anyone reading this that if they just reflect behavior they'll be fine. This means if someone shares something moderately personal, do the same. If someone laughs, laugh back. To mimic behavior is to be human. Be human.

ThomPete 9y ago
No it's not but it's hard for the hysteria to settle and thus a lot of men will be wrongfully accused.
- neom 9y ago
  Wrongfully accused of what? OP literally described how not to be accused of anything 101. Treat women like your fellow man, treat women like humans.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    I know what OP is describing and I am saying that that's not enough as there are difference of opinion with regards to what that means. For some saying sweetie is sexual abuse.
    - tabeth 9y ago
      I'm curious: would you call a man sweetie?
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        No just like I wouldn't call a girl bro or dude or m8. I see no issue in saying that to someone and have never had any problems saying it to the women I have been working with or know. I am well aware of when to do that and when to not. Yet now it's suddenly become an issue because some consider it sexual abuse.

rhelmer 9y ago

I'm not sure why this is hard... why is any amount of flirting, or innuendo etc. at work OK? I do realize that people spend much of their time at work, and it's a place people meet. Personally, now that we have dating sites and such I would not risk my career by trying to initiate a relationship with someone I am working with... I'd rather avoid even just the mild awkwardness of someone being uncomfortable at me asking them for coffee or dinner, and having to then work with them after that.

ThomPete 9y ago
It's not that simple. This isn't just some trend which can be fixed with a little logic. This is something that is changing the discussion fundamentally turning men guilty by default. The metoo campaign IM basically allowed anything from actual abuse to catcalling be called sexual abuse. It expanded the definition of sexual abuse to basically align with only the most extreme feminists. Men are now by definition guilty and any attempt at bringing nuance to the discussion will mark you as a possible perpetrator yourself.
- xionon 9y ago
  > The metoo campaign IM basically allowed anything from actual abuse to catcalling be called sexual abuse. It expanded the definition of sexual abuse to basically align with only the most extreme feminists. Are you implying that catcalling someone, in or out of the workplace, should not be considered sexual abuse?
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    I am saying that there is a context to these kind of social dynamics which can't just be considered binary. It depends on the situation. All that get's lost in the panic.
    - rhelmer 9y ago
      Catcalling just seems like a bad example... I can't think of a situation where that seems appropriate? I'm really not seeing why any of this belongs in the workplace. Why not bars, or if you're not the nightlife type, dating sites?

adriand 9y ago

I've been an owner of a company for years now and I've always followed a few simple rules with the women who work for our company: - I never, ever comment on their appearance, including new hairstyles, clothing, etc. - I refer to them as "women", never as "ladies" or "girls" or other nonsense. - No touching (hugs, etc.) with the exception of handshakes and high fives. - I don't engage in, or tolerate, any sexist, sexual or otherwise inappropriate conversations. I will, however, happily go for lunch, have a drink, etc., as I would any other colleague. Incidentally I regularly break some of these rules with male employees, such as remarking on haircuts ("looking good", etc.), but it's different. (I maintain the rule about sexist/sexual conversations across the board - talking about women with male colleagues isn't cool either.) I could probably break some of these rules with some of the women in my office without causing offence too, especially the people I'm closer with - e.g. by remarking on a new outfit or something - but I don't want to be a creep so I just play it super safe with everybody. It's really not all that difficult: be a professional, don't be a creep, and err on the side of caution. If you have to overcompensate like Pence, it's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative.

xupybd 9y ago
>If you have to overcompensate like Pence, it's still a hell of a lot better than the alternative. I kind of think Pence is being smart. Conservative politicians can't survive that sort of scandal so being really careful can't hurt. Also I think there is some wisdom in not always trusting yourself not to cross the line, why not just keep your self as far away from the line as you can reasonably maintain. Kinda like ulysses tied to the mast, it's just safer that way.
- BEEdwards 9y ago
  >Conservative politicians can't survive that sort of scandal so being really careful can't hurt. Roy Moore would love to talk to you. Or more specifically your daughter if she's around... *Moore is know for dating underage girls and has been for a long time, yet it didn't hurt his political career. You can downvote, but the fact is conservatives only pay lip service to caring about morality. http://www.businessinsider.com/roy-moore-former-colleague-common-knowledge-hedated-high-school-girls-2017-11 http://www.businessinsider.com/roy-moore-former-colleague-co...

debacle 9y ago

I've overstepped with women. Women have overstepped with me. There is definitely a graciously wide gray area of "That came out differently than I meant it." The key is to: 1. Understand your own intent when saying/doing something. 2. Consider the potential negative ways something you may say could be perceived. 3. Understand the additional social responsibility that comes with being someone's superior, explicit or implicit.

T2_t2 9y ago
4. Hope no one takes further something that is a misunderstanding? I dunno where we are going here, and I'm not sure all this stuff isn't confirming the exact opposite of everything people are hoping for. I'm not sure why the next Harvey Weinstein won't act the exact same way ("You mean, I get to sleep with beautiful women for 30 years and then get outed worth 100s of millions? That's seems like a great deal") I don't think anyone has any idea how this will shake out, but I won't be shocked if it is a bad outcome all around - from reduced funding for female startups to less mentoring to more gender apartheid in workplaces, to China's inevitable rise to world's largest economy and most influential country.
- debacle 9y ago
  I had an edit where I added: 4. Treat people like individuals. But I didn't want to needlessly extend the list, even though that's the most important advice you could give anyone about interacting with anyone else. Most people who commit sexual harassment aren't Harvey Weinstein. Most flirting is innocent, and in my experience either slightly awkward, ignored, or well received, but rarely uncomfortable. Most male/female relationships (or any relationships for that matter) in the workplace are healthy, friendly, and beneficial. There is a vast difference between inappropriate social interaction due to ignorance, and predatory social interaction due to malice.
dognotdog 9y ago
I can see risk of that gray area: as long as everybody is on good terms, misunderstandings and unintentional wrongdoings are quickly righted, but when either party is antagonistic, that no longer works, and things can get ugly in both directions: unintended harm as well as false accusations both have real consequences. But, human interaction will never be without ambiguity, and we cannot eliminate the risk of being misunderstood or deliberately misconstrued without (especially) marginalizing those who are at a disadvantage in the first place. I feel like this is the right way to approach things: treat everyone respectfully and responsibly, even if there's a slight risk to it. (As a strawman: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety")

simonsarris 9y ago

I think the second order effects here are under appreciated. Ponder, which of these is overstepping? * Telling someone they look good today * Telling someone a very funny, yet lewd joke that you just thought up * Inviting someone for a drink after work * Telling someone they should dress better * Telling someone they are too uptight * Telling someone that, if they were nicer, they might get ahead more * Inviting a co-worker to a party with lots of alcohol (example given in article) You might think, "This is easy, clearly XYZ above are fine whereas ABC are not or could be questionable." But here's the problem: For a man talking to a man, all of the above are just plain fine. Some may think that even in very low risk interactions, "why take the risk, if it could be misconstrued?" In a very tiny way even asking these questions opens me up to the risk of someone suggesting I'm some kind of sexist/bigot/etc, even though I'm only trying to be descriptive and not normative here, because someone may misinterpret a position here. In fact I'm sure there are plenty of people who would never comment on an article like this. But I bet they'll talk to their male co-workers about it, in private. Which is kind of the rub. The net result of this round of men-wondering-of-they-are-overstepping may be even more boys club behavior than before. How is it possible for men to treat women equally with other men, if it introduces such risk? I've seen all sorts of people advocating positions that boil down to "Don't make any friends at work, work is a place for work and nothing else." This seems like a losing strategy. Not all difficult problems have broad solutions. Sometimes, spraying a pesticide increases the level of pests. > Still, some workers said they were starting to follow “the Pence rule,” which was formerly known as the Billy Graham rule, after the evangelical preacher, but is now named for Vice President Mike Pence. Mr. Pence has said he does not eat alone with women who are not his wife or attend an event without her if alcohol will be served. Maybe it is worth noting that Women are more likely than men to endorse Mike-Pence-style inter-gender workplace norms. From the NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/upshot/members-of-the-opposite-sex-at-work-gender-study.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/01/upshot/members-of-the-opp...

tabeth 9y ago
> For a man talking to a man, all of the above are just plain fine. Really? I wouldn't do most of your examples, personally. I'm curious if I'm the weird one here.

jenga22 9y ago

I am not sure why men go to happy hours with alcohol or go to social events where the chances of stepping over the line explode exponentially. Going out and hanging with your co-workers over a beer might have been a good idea six months ago but is no longer a good idea. Why? Any of those things you said or did, could be construed a million different ways. Was that one thing you said flirting? Did you say that one thing that offended someone who went thru this particular experience as a child you were unaware of? Did you talk about that actor you really liked that turned out to be a child molester today and now makes you look less than acceptable? Your past behavior carries weight today. What was once acceptable might not be today and there are consequences today. You will lose your career and job over even the faintest claim. Here is the money paragraph: > Still, some workers said they were starting to follow “the Pence rule,” which was formerly known as the Billy Graham rule, after the evangelical preacher, but is now named for Vice President Mike Pence. Mr. Pence has said he does not eat alone with women who are not his wife or attend an event without her if alcohol will be served. I would even arguing going to those "game zones" is all potentially risky behavior. I know I am not being politically correct, however just doing your job and leaving is a better solution. It is better than losing everything over it.

Balgair 9y ago
> You will lose your career and job over even the faintest claim. We'll see. Unfortunately, the 'track record' is not promising to those people that have accused their abusers. What has actually happened? Yes, Harv is in some deep stuff, but Kevin may slip out just fine. Donny pretty much got away scot-free. Give it time to mature, we may be disappointed to find that effectively nothing will occur. Also, going out drinking with co-workers/bosses has always been an 'eyebrow raising' idea, right? Even a beer or two has always been a point of caution. Was anyone (not in a SV-frat-house-turned-startup) under any other impression?
- jenga22 9y ago
  Almost everyone in NYC goes out at 5 for drinks and they get shit faced. While this is great for team building, it is now not a great idea for reasons that are obvious. It is not a SV thing by any measure.

xor1 9y ago

I treat all interactions with coworkers (male or female or otherwise) as if I were under surveillance by the KGB or Stasi, and any sort of misstep would mean imprisonment or death. I also refuse to ever drink with coworkers. It's worked out so far.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

erikbye 9y ago

A woman at work constantly speaks in tones of sexual innuendo, when she comes over to someone asking for help or whatever, she leans over you and places her hand on your shoulder or thigh. As a man in today’s climate the double standard is painfully obvious. Follow her example and you’d be on your ass fast.

colanderman 9y ago
What double standard? If a female co-worker did that to me I'd bring it up with HR. And – I'm making the assumption that you are probably in tech and therefore probably in a male-dominated workplace – unlike a woman in your situation, you can almost certainly call out the individual in question with zero fear of consequences to your career. Without knowing specifics, my prejudice is that you are in no position to complain. (My assumptions could be wrong.)
- erikbye 9y ago
  The double standard is that she still has her job but a man wouldn’t.
  - colanderman 9y ago
    Bullshit. Tens of thousands of men who sexually harass women get away scot-free day in day out. The men you mention lost their jobs because the women they harassed spoke out (and almost always, they did so under fear of reprisal). It didn't just "happen". Have you spoken to HR or your boss?
  - _MK_ 9y ago
    Guess whose job it is to bring it with HR and make sure they understand the double standard you see? You and everyone else you can round up that agrees with you. Make it happen like women have always had to do.
  - Kluny 9y ago
    Bring it up with HR. See what happens.

aerovistae 9y ago

I thought this was talking about the band, singers of the timeless "Land Down Under."

Mz 9y ago

I don't think it is helpful to pretend there is no gray area. Talking about how to avoid grey areas is good. Pretending they don't exist is potentially dangerous and strikes me as toxic and blamey.

noobermin 9y ago
I think there might be a gray area, but it's probably less broad than people make it out to be.
- Mz 9y ago
  I have found that it is possible to entirely avoid gray areas by abiding by very strict standards that avoid any possible misinterpretation. I have also found this makes me seem cold, rejecting and unapproachable. Establishing trust is a kind of bonding process. It involves taking risks. If you put nothing on the line, you don't bond. If you are never warm, trust is unlikely. If you are ever warm, confusion about intent remains possible. I don't think I can agree with you.
  - noobermin 9y ago
    I mean, a lot of it can just be people are different and will find they need to do different things in order to interact with others successfully without problems, so if you need rules, I suppose that's just you. An aside, but regarding your "coldness." I don't think that's a problem. Most people I think even when they are "warm" aren't necessarily naive and too willing to trust although society stereotypes them that way.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]

telesilla 9y ago

20 years ago I walked into a server room where the walls sported naked/semi-naked women and the inhabiting men looked at me like I was there to take away their wall candy. I chose to leave and made another career for myself, because I was too young and afraid to stand my ground. I don't regret this, because I went on to have an amazing life, but I never again stepped foot in a room like that and I do regret never working with a massive Oracle installation or learning how to get the most out of a PERL app running on metal. I lost out, and I hate that I never had the opportunity to experience working at corporate scale. I am willing to bet those rooms still exist, but almost all of the rest of my career I've found men welcoming and courteous, the same as the women I now work with. Things have changed and they are changing for the better - this is all just part of the discussion we gotta have. It's getting better folks - the fact that women can now speak out in public means we are less scared, and we'll be able to interact more and you'll have a lot more women as company down the road. Here's an exacting analysis by the ever-helpful Dan Savage on the Louis CK incident which covers similar ground (work-related harassment and power relations): http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/10/25557816/savage-love-letter-of-the-day http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/10/25557816/savage-l...

fencepost 9y ago
20 years ago walking out was the right choice - not necessarily because of the blatant sexism but because of the massive glaringly obvious and uncorrected mismanagement in that particular environment. The problem was not just that there were a bunch of jerks with pinups on the walls, it's that any competent management in the late 90s should have eliminated that within the first 5 minutes of walking into that room.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  so now you are a jerk if you have pinups on the wall?
  - telesilla 9y ago
    If by "pinups" you mean centrefolds from mens magazines, it's not appropriate in any work environment without the permission of all involved. When I was 20 years old I simply did not have the courage or understanding that I might have asked them to take the posters down or find something less confronting.

throwawayn0w4y 9y ago

This situation is completely blown out of proportion and ridiculous. When you have members of the opposite sex sharing space every day, sex is a factor, and there really needs to be some amount of reality brought back into this discussion. The prevailing attitude reminds me of religious parents acting as if their teenage children are not going to have sexual relations, and refusing to educate them on sex as a result. The majority of jobs I've had exposed me to sexual harassment and assault in various forms. I've had female office managers hanging their arm around me and petting my hand while I try to eat lunch after weeks of my ignoring their verbal advances. I've had female sales women grinding their breasts against me while rinding to a company offsite team-builder in a shuttle bus. As far as I'm concerned this is par for the course when you stick women and men in the same space. I don't feel like these women crossed a line worth making a big deal about, it's not as if I was raped. They were mildly annoying, but we're adults, and I'm not deluding myself into believing we're going to be robots in a coed office without ever letting our sex enter the picture. In all my experiences, the women gave up pretty quickly. It's as if they were just going out of their way to make it blatantly obvious they were interested, because my acting aloof and ignoring their more subtle advances weren't convincing enough. They probably assumed I was being shy (quiet, introverted, software engineer). I personally feel people need to calm down a bit on this topic, and yes I'd like to see the double standard go away. Attraction happens, if people are civil about it and not too persistent, I'd rather there be a reasonable threshold of tolerance on both sides of this.

comstock 9y ago
Those sound like somewhat mild examples of the sort of sexual harassment many women suffer. But the behavior you describe, I would not consider acceptable. I personally would not want to work somewhere that was considered “ok” and would probably at this point mention it to the person involved, HR or their manager.

hamandcheese 9y ago

> After-work events are “the front line” when it comes to harassment, and companies want “more safety precautions” now, she said. This makes me sad. I feel like letting your guard down and getting a little wild can lead to some pretty good camaraderie and friendship.

mindvirus 9y ago

My partner is a software engineer, and she has experienced an enormous amount of inappropriate behavior - everything from "was that inappropriate, am I being too sensitive?" to a person getting fired and walked out by security for their behavior toward her (extremely justifiably). None of this has ever happened to me, though. Even in the more innocuous cases, it leads to a ton of self-doubt. Part of the problem is the volume of it - these aren't one-off instances, but repeated questioning of one's worth as a human being and member of the team. I like unconscious bias as a model for addressing this because it lets you flip the equation around on these cases. Imagine someone who tells women at work to smile. By accusing them of being sexist, the argument becomes about whether they're being sexist - and they'll inevitably argue that they're not, they're just being nice, people are being too sensitive/PC and in the end nothing happens. And it's really not the individual instance of it that's the problem, but the volume of it - and not just from that person, but from everyone. And this really serves to diffuse responsibility. Unconscious bias would say to recognize your own biases, and rather than have the argument about whether or not you're sexist/racist/whatever, to think about how you can treat people equally, and correct for your biases. And then, rather than trying to apply labels to people, we can have a real conversation about behavior - and correct ones behavior and build systems to accommodate for these biases. For example, if someone repeatedly interrupts someone in a meeting, they might not even know it (hence, _unconscious_ bias). If you accuse that person of being sexist, the conversation stops there. But if people subscribe to unconscious bias, it can be a learning experience "hey, I noticed you interrupted X a few times in that meeting" it can be a chance to understand ones biases - "oh, I didn't mean to. I'll be mindful of that in the future." And you can even go a step further, and create systems to compensate - have a rule that one person can talk at a time (say by holding a ball), or a culture where you explicitly acknowledge any ideas you're building on before you suggest something. Obviously there's no silver bullet to solving this, and there are bigger issues than people being interrupted in meetings, but I've found when people subscribe to this philosophy of self-reflection and mindfulness, it goes a long way in creating a positive environment where people are treated like people.

sp527 9y ago

This has become almost cartoonish. The people being accused of sexual harassment did overtly and obviously abusive things. That doesn’t call for a referendum on the entire scope of male-female interactions. If you have to wonder whether you’re a sexual harasser and aren’t stupid or deliberately oblivious, then the answer is you are not one. You may still be somewhere on the misogyny spectrum. You may even make women feel uncomfortable with some of the things you say and do. But the term sexual harassment should be reserved for obviously inappropriate conduct, and not be cheapened into some thin-gray-line class of transgression. Also if our society starts treating flirting with or attempting to date coworkers as problematic behavior, people will lose the opportunity to potentially find mates in an environment to which they’re devoting increasingly larger shares of their lives. The only people who will win in that scenario are the therapists.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
JBlue42 9y ago
Yes, thank you. You pretty much echoed something John Scalzi said on his blog: https://whatever.scalzi.com/2017/11/12/a-qa-for-the-post-weinstein-era/ https://whatever.scalzi.com/2017/11/12/a-qa-for-the-post-wei... It's a bit long but worth reading. At the end: "Dudes, don’t be a harassing piece of shit, don’t accept other dudes being harassing pieces of shit, and when women (and others) tell you that someone has harassed or assaulted them, believe them."
flukus 9y ago
> The people being accused of sexual harassment did overtly and obviously abusive things. They were accused of doing those things, the accusations alone were enough to be career ending, that's the problem. As long as society is fine with vilifying people on accusations alone then the only defense is to not put yourself into a situation where such an accusation can be made.
- telesilla 9y ago
  Please read the Scalzi blog post linked above: "Aside from the actual fact that a woman accusing a man of harassment has her life turned into such a shitshow that the bar for her choosing to tell her story is almost unspeakably high (and therefore not fertile ground for lying), I want you to consider a singular and depressing fact, which is that nearly every woman you know has actual dudes who’ve harassed them. They will go after them, rather than outright lying about you."

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]