5 ms·

You can believe sexual harassment is everywhere and also believe chat widgets are annoying. Sadly, women getting harassed on the internet by anonymous strangers

You can believe sexual harassment is everywhere and also believe chat widgets are annoying. Sadly, women getting harassed on the internet by anonymous strangers, while unfortunate, is not a novel revelation. Anyone who says it isn’t common has their head in the sand. You can’t help people like that.

DarkWiiPlayer 9y ago
A single message is not harassment though.
- rectang 9y ago
  You can't make that blanket statement. A single punch is battery. A single genital grab is sexual assault. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is sexual harassment. A single message asserting that an individual is not right for their job because of their gender creates a hostile work environment, and that's also sexual harassment. Just because there can be cases where a single message does not constitute sexual harassment doesn't mean that a single message can never amount to sexual harassment.
  - naikrovek 9y ago
    A single event can be illegal, immoral, wrong, or any one of a bunch of other words, and a single event is never harassment because harassment requires multiple events. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. IANAL, though the dictionary definition sticks with me, especially the key words: "multiple", "unwanted", and "intentional". That's why "harassment" as a word exists, it is to indicate that multiple unwanted events have happened intentionally. Maybe the legal definition of "harassment" differs from the dictionary definition. If so, a new word for single event harassment needs to be chosen.
    - rectang 9y ago
      > A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. That's simply wrong -- a single egregious instance can certainly constitute harassment, both in terms of common sense and in terms of legal consequences. What matters is severity -- and though repeating the behavior makes it more likely to be judged as severe, one bad incident can easily exceed the threshold. A quid-pro-quo proposal of sex-for-promotion is a perfect example.
      - naikrovek 9y ago
        But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment. Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...
        rectang 9y ago
        Harassment does not require "multiple". That's just wrong.
        naikrovek 9y ago
        The dictionary of definition DEFINITELY does. (Caps for emphasis, not yelling.)
        rectang 9y ago
        It is not a requirement. Consider the Oxford English definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment > Aggressive pressure or intimidation. ‘they face daily harassment and assault on the streets’ English doesn't have a definitive dictionary, anyway -- usage determines meaning. It has been the case for decades that a single quid pro quo proposal could be ruled as "harassment" in court. (As it should be!) Is it any wonder that colloquial understanding would reflect legal reality?
    - 9y ago
- ashelmire 9y ago
  If you're talking about the legal definition, that depends largely on your jurisdiction (there are many where a single instance does constitute harassment; perhaps most states in the US require a "culture"). Unfortunately again, common language and legal language overlap but with slightly different meanings. However, in every case where multiple messages were sent, that's clearly harassment in many jurisdictions. Additionally, the sum of actions by multiple people constitutes harassment. Also many jurisdictions will consider it harassment if there is a single, severe incident. However, many of these laws only apply when a co-worker is the harasser. In summation: your statement is not necessarily correct.
- stordoff 9y ago
  Somewhat depends on your point of view. A single message sent may not be intended as harassment, but receiving a single message from multiple people can certainly feel like harassment. An individual act might not be harassment, but it can definitely contribute to it.

DarkWiiPlayer 9y ago

A single message is not harassment though.

rectang 9y ago
You can't make that blanket statement. A single punch is battery. A single genital grab is sexual assault. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is sexual harassment. A single message asserting that an individual is not right for their job because of their gender creates a hostile work environment, and that's also sexual harassment. Just because there can be cases where a single message does not constitute sexual harassment doesn't mean that a single message can never amount to sexual harassment.
- naikrovek 9y ago
  A single event can be illegal, immoral, wrong, or any one of a bunch of other words, and a single event is never harassment because harassment requires multiple events. A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. IANAL, though the dictionary definition sticks with me, especially the key words: "multiple", "unwanted", and "intentional". That's why "harassment" as a word exists, it is to indicate that multiple unwanted events have happened intentionally. Maybe the legal definition of "harassment" differs from the dictionary definition. If so, a new word for single event harassment needs to be chosen.
  - rectang 9y ago
    > A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. That's simply wrong -- a single egregious instance can certainly constitute harassment, both in terms of common sense and in terms of legal consequences. What matters is severity -- and though repeating the behavior makes it more likely to be judged as severe, one bad incident can easily exceed the threshold. A quid-pro-quo proposal of sex-for-promotion is a perfect example.
    - naikrovek 9y ago
      But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment. Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...
      - rectang 9y ago
        Harassment does not require "multiple". That's just wrong.
        naikrovek 9y ago
        The dictionary of definition DEFINITELY does. (Caps for emphasis, not yelling.)
        rectang 9y ago
        It is not a requirement. Consider the Oxford English definition: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/harassment > Aggressive pressure or intimidation. ‘they face daily harassment and assault on the streets’ English doesn't have a definitive dictionary, anyway -- usage determines meaning. It has been the case for decades that a single quid pro quo proposal could be ruled as "harassment" in court. (As it should be!) Is it any wonder that colloquial understanding would reflect legal reality?
  - 9y ago
ashelmire 9y ago
If you're talking about the legal definition, that depends largely on your jurisdiction (there are many where a single instance does constitute harassment; perhaps most states in the US require a "culture"). Unfortunately again, common language and legal language overlap but with slightly different meanings. However, in every case where multiple messages were sent, that's clearly harassment in many jurisdictions. Additionally, the sum of actions by multiple people constitutes harassment. Also many jurisdictions will consider it harassment if there is a single, severe incident. However, many of these laws only apply when a co-worker is the harasser. In summation: your statement is not necessarily correct.
stordoff 9y ago
Somewhat depends on your point of view. A single message sent may not be intended as harassment, but receiving a single message from multiple people can certainly feel like harassment. An individual act might not be harassment, but it can definitely contribute to it.