3 ms·

Here's the thing - It doesn't matter. If you run {startup X}, and your business guy puts out a presentation with women in bikinis that makes one of your female

Here's the thing - It doesn't matter. If you run {startup X}, and your business guy puts out a presentation with women in bikinis that makes one of your female employees uncomfortable, and you don't do something about it immediately, she has a potential sexual harassment claim that is going to cost {startup X} _years_ worth of funding in legal fees and damages. The "oh {business guy} is just a bit awkward and didn't know any better" defense is NOT going to go far in court. If you thought some piece of software had a chance of failing and costing you millions of dollars and hundreds of hours of distraction, wouldn't you do _everything_ possible to fix it? Legal policy needs to be treated the same way.

groby_b 15y ago
I sincerely hope that this is not what people perceive to be the problem with it. (It's also wrong. Sexual harassment claims require repeated offenses that generate a climate of hostility. Yay, corporate sensitivity/harassment training ;) The bigger issue is that - should you have a woman on your team - you just told her in not so many words that you perceive women more as a piece of visual stimulation than an actual person. That hurts. The even bigger issue: You subtly say to all the attendees of your talk that you consider it OK to look at women that way. Enough people do that, you have created a climate of harassment - it just stretches over an entire industry.
- showerst 15y ago
  You're right that it shouldn't ever have to be the main reason, my point merely is that the punishment is a critical threat to your business, which is something that I think would strike home even among the most misogynistic members of the tech crowd. You're wrong about it requiring repeated events [1] [1] http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employharass.html http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employharass.html - Search in the page for 'Taylor v. Metzger'. (IANAL, but it's usually better to be safe than sorry when it comes to not being an idiot.)
  - groby_b 15y ago
    True, but it requires extreme circumstances. Unfortunately, the kind of harassment women usually experience is not counted at that. I'll bet money that no jury will consider bikini pictures extreme harassment.

groby_b 15y ago

I sincerely hope that this is not what people perceive to be the problem with it. (It's also wrong. Sexual harassment claims require repeated offenses that generate a climate of hostility. Yay, corporate sensitivity/harassment training ;) The bigger issue is that - should you have a woman on your team - you just told her in not so many words that you perceive women more as a piece of visual stimulation than an actual person. That hurts. The even bigger issue: You subtly say to all the attendees of your talk that you consider it OK to look at women that way. Enough people do that, you have created a climate of harassment - it just stretches over an entire industry.

showerst 15y ago
You're right that it shouldn't ever have to be the main reason, my point merely is that the punishment is a critical threat to your business, which is something that I think would strike home even among the most misogynistic members of the tech crowd. You're wrong about it requiring repeated events [1] [1] http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employharass.html http://www.connellfoley.com/seminar/employharass.html - Search in the page for 'Taylor v. Metzger'. (IANAL, but it's usually better to be safe than sorry when it comes to not being an idiot.)
- groby_b 15y ago
  True, but it requires extreme circumstances. Unfortunately, the kind of harassment women usually experience is not counted at that. I'll bet money that no jury will consider bikini pictures extreme harassment.