The Behavior Americans Count as Sexual Harassment

[NewCreation435]

"In fact, three in 10 American adults (29%) tell Barna they have been sexually harassed. Women in this group report experiencing it almost three times more than men (42% vs 16%). Younger generations also report harassment at a higher rate: Millennials (31%) and Gen X (35%) are twice as likely as Elders (16%) to say they have been sexually harassed, with Boomers somewhere in the middle (26%). A further 15 percent of all adults say they have witnessed sexual harassment, and almost one-quarter (23%) says someone they know well was sexually harassed. However, the majority of American adults (52%) says they have not encountered sexual harassment in any of these ways"

rest of the article here
https://www.barna.com/research/behaviors-americans-count-as-harassment/

are you surprised by these numbers?

 

[Imalive]

No. I noticed that. If they lay a hand on their butt they already call it harassment and if a guy yells at his wife he assaults her or abuses whatever. Term gets meaningless that way.

 

[Albion]

It's like so many other concepts and terms that become "pop hits." They're almost fads.

Worse, however, what always happens is that a genuine concern is turned--by a sloppy use of the terminology--into something else. We have this example you are talking about, but we also have, for example, "bashing." When that started, it meant literal beatings. But in a little while, merely disagreeing with someone else's opinion would get you called a "Basher."

People reach for the word that has the most "punch" to it, even if that means exaggerating...and that in turn makes the word or phrase just a slur, not something meaningful.

 

[Imalive]

LOL even whistling or winking. Oh my.
There was an American waitress who beat a guy up cause he put his hand on her butt and the police picked him up. Saw that on bored panda. The responses. Fabulous! You go girl! The Dutch girls: well we just tell em to act normal, we don't like that and then they stop.

 

[hedrick]

No. I noticed that. If they lay a hand on their butt they already call it harassment and if a guy yells at his wife he assaults her or abuses whatever. Term gets meaningless that way.

Why shouldn't laying a hand on someone's butt be considered harassment? It's certainly not rape, but there's no reason to touch someone if they don't want it. Normally people wouldn't make an issue of it unless it's repeated.

Similarly with yelling at someone. Everyone gets angry at times. But a pattern of yelling at someone all the time can become abusive.

 

[Albion]

All that is reasonable to say, but we have examples of people saying that they were "harassed" simply because a man was in the habit of calling them "sweetheart" at work or going out of his way to stop by their work station and make small talk. Some of this can be boorish, it's true, but when sexual harassment laws were first being proposed, it was insisted that there would have to be actual harassment, i.e. the "victim" would have to make clear to the other party that they did not want the attention in question (among other requirements) and that it continued just the same. All of that is gone now and all that is necessary is to say that the guy asked me on a date and I didn't find him attractive, etc.

 

[NewCreation435]

All that is reasonable to say, but we have examples of people saying that they were "harassed" simply because a man was in the habit of calling them "sweetheart" at work or going out of his way to stop by their work station and make small talk. Some of this can be boorish, it's true, but when sexual harassment laws were first being proposed, it was insisted that there would have to be actual harassment, i.e. the "victim" would have to make clear to the other party that they did not want the attention in question (among other requirements) and that it continued just the same. All of that is gone now and all that is necessary is to say that the guy asked me on a date and I didn't find him attractive, etc.

There's some places in the south if you go to a resturant or a store and a lady calls you "honey" or "sweetie" or something like that it really doesn't mean anything, except maybe they want a bigger tip. it really isn't a term of endearment in situations like that. You have to understand the culture

 

[Albion]

There's some places in the south if you go to a resturant or a store and a lady calls you "honey" or "sweetie" or something like that it really doesn't mean anything, except maybe they want a bigger tip. it really isn't a term of endearment in situations like that. You have to understand the culture

You are correct about that way of speaking, yes. However, I am willing to agree that the same kind of talk is possibly less acceptable if it comes from a man, a co-worker, and--in particular--if it is your boss or supervisor. Still, the point stands, I think, that much of this is ill-defined but yet we are still supposed to be outraged the minute some accusation is levelled.

 

[tango]

No. I noticed that. If they lay a hand on their butt they already call it harassment and if a guy yells at his wife he assaults her or abuses whatever. Term gets meaningless that way.

I remember seeing a video on faceache of a woman saying her bit against the growing claims of sexual harassment. Her case was essentially that some of the women concerned had done little more than prostitute themselves to get ahead, then complained that someone had taken advantage of them. Apparently one of the alleged victims had (willingly) performed in a nude lesbian scene in order to get her break into the film industry but then complained she had been harassed. It's hard to see how the term "harassment" can be taken seriously when people do taht sort of thing, and equally hard to take it seriously when people make claims of harassment and abuse decades after the fact.

When the whole me-too hashtag was gaining traction a woman I know wrote of her experience of being harassed. Apparently someone had assumed she was the secretary rather than the senior researcher she was, all because she was female. Poor dear. Something very similar happened to another friend - someone assumed he was the intern when he was a newly hired senior researcher. Nothing to do with sexism, he just looks much younger than he is. He didn't get to claim victim status over it, he just shrugged it off as one of those things. Another friend is annoyed when he answers the door and the first thing he is asked is whether his parents are home (he's married with children, he just looks much younger than he is). It happens, people make mistakes, but when people are looking out for discrimination behind every corner an innocent mistake becomes "proof" of sexism. In that regard it's no different to the team I worked on years ago that had six white guys and one black guy. The black guy wasn't very good at his job but cried racism if he was ever called out on it. One of the white guys wasn't very good at his job either but didn't have an "ism" to claim to deflect valid criticism.

Of course a large part of the issue is that terms that should mean something end up meaning nothing in particular, so the person who has truly been sexually harassed at work ends up with her claims devalued because of so much usage of the term in contexts that are meaningless.

 

[Imalive]

Why shouldn't laying a hand on someone's butt be considered harassment? It's certainly not rape, but there's no reason to touch someone if they don't want it. Normally people wouldn't make an issue of it unless it's repeated.

Similarly with yelling at someone. Everyone gets angry at times. But a pattern of yelling at someone all the time can become abusive.

Harassment or groping, when I first heard women say that or that they had been abused for years by their dad, I was like: oh my, how terrible. I thought they had been at least half raped. And then you get the explanation. Ehm yeah right. Get over it. Gimme a break.

 

[tango]

All that is reasonable to say, but we have examples of people saying that they were "harassed" simply because a man was in the habit of calling them "sweetheart" at work or going out of his way to stop by their work station and make small talk. Some of this can be boorish, it's true, but when sexual harassment laws were first being proposed, it was insisted that there would have to be actual harassment, i.e. the "victim" would have to make clear to the other party that they did not want the attention in question (among other requirements) and that it continued just the same. All of that is gone now and all that is necessary is to say that the guy asked me on a date and I didn't find him attractive, etc.

This is where the basic concept of common sense seems to come into play.

If you find a co-worker attractive/interesting/whatever in a sense that you'd like to get to know them better and ask them to join you for a drink after work, and they reply by saying they really aren't interested, it's reasonable for them to expect that to be the end of it unless they give you some clear indication that maybe they might be interested after all. If they respond with an impression they'd like to but have other commitments that evening, it's not unreasonable that they might be asked again another time. Of course if they've been asked 23 times and given an increasingly lame excuse for not being able to accept 23 times there comes a point when it should be clear to anyone that they really aren't interested but in most situations it doesn't seem like to much to ask, given we're presumably talking about competent adults here, for someone to have the basic decency to say "thanks, but no thanks" rather than endlessly making excuses.

The idea that being turned down when asking someone on a date means the very invitation became a form of harassment is utterly absurd, but sadly that seems to be the way things are going.

 

[Imalive]

Hi wanna go have some coffee?
Police!!!!!!!!

 

[Imalive]

Oh we have the same thing. Just saw it in the online newspaper.
50 percent of women have been kissed or touched sexually against their will. 20 percent had forced sex or was forced to do sexual stuff.
5 percent of women and 2 percent of men had sexual violence before 12.
25 percent of men and 45 percent of women who had sexual violence had it later again.

https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/gezondheid/nog-veel-aanrakingen-en-seks-tegen-de-wil-van-vrouwen

40 percent of women and 29 percent of men have psychological problems because of sexual violence.
1 on 4 has sexual problems because of it.
15 percent of men and 24 percent of women had relation problems because of sexual violence.
Most who did it were well known.

They split it up to what is, much clearer.

 

[Imalive]

We once had a weekend w church where ppl got prayer and were set free from soul ties etc. There was one guy who didnt need that cause he waited til marriage. All the women had been raped either as a kid or later.
It was a tiny group we had, but that was quite shocking.

 

[Stravinsk]

"In fact, three in 10 American adults (29%) tell Barna they have been sexually harassed. Women in this group report experiencing it almost three times more than men (42% vs 16%). Younger generations also report harassment at a higher rate: Millennials (31%) and Gen X (35%) are twice as likely as Elders (16%) to say they have been sexually harassed, with Boomers somewhere in the middle (26%). A further 15 percent of all adults say they have witnessed sexual harassment, and almost one-quarter (23%) says someone they know well was sexually harassed. However, the majority of American adults (52%) says they have not encountered sexual harassment in any of these ways"

rest of the article here
https://www.barna.com/research/behaviors-americans-count-as-harassment/

are you surprised by these numbers?

Surprised, no. However I think the definition of the phrase certainly gets a little too loose especially when considering the last few items on the initial list. If someone winks or flirts with me, or even makes an offhanded suggestion of sex, AND the person is not in a place of power over me (for example, an employer or manager), AND I have not made it clear such actions are unwelcome - then absolutely it is not "sexual harassment". Heck, that's happened to me in work situations with females sometimes and it doesn't bother me at all, unless I have 0 interest and have made that as clear as I can.

 

[hedrick]

Surprised, no. However I think the definition of the phrase certainly gets a little too loose especially when considering the last few items on the initial list. If someone winks or flirts with me, or even makes an offhanded suggestion of sex, AND the person is not in a place of power over me (for example, an employer or manager), AND I have not made it clear such actions are unwelcome - then absolutely it is not "sexual harassment". Heck, that's happened to me in work situations with females sometimes and it doesn't bother me at all, unless I have 0 interest and have made that as clear as I can.

I think things like speaking of people in a demeaning way, touching without permission, etc., need to stop. But it's important when you look at statistics to understand just what is meant by abuse and harassment. It's easy to get the impression that lots of people have been raped when they haven't. In some ways the increased reporting of harassment by the younger generation is a good thing. We no longer accept things that we used to, and that's good. It doesn't mean that millennials are snowflakes, but that they have higher standards of behavior. But when looking at statistics we need to understand what people mean.

 

[Stravinsk]

I think things like speaking of people in a demeaning way, touching without permission, etc., need to stop. But it's important when you look at statistics to understand just what is meant by abuse and harassment. It's easy to get the impression that lots of people have been raped when they haven't. In some ways the increased reporting of harassment by the younger generation is a good thing. We no longer accept things that we used to, and that's good. It doesn't mean that millennials are snowflakes, but that they have higher standards of behavior. But when looking at statistics we need to understand what people mean.

Have you ever touched a female, someone you knew but were not in a relationship with somewhere non sexual like shoulder, elbow, hair, neck? I have, plenty of times, and usually because I can clearly see it's not unwanted nor immoral (she is single, of age etc). If I was mistaken and get a scowl or sharp rebuke or even a polite "please do not do that" - I would stop. To date that's never happened because usually it's clear she doesn't mind and/or is welcoming it. However to continue otherwise is clearly harassment.

Context does matter.

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

When it comes to "definitions", then gleaning results based on responses to questions such as "have you ever experienced (Definition'X')", I'm quite wary when it comes to these polls, especially from the Barna Group. Defining variables isn't simple to do, and it appears they've tried to define "sexual harassment" in a number of non-specific ways to glean specific results.

 

[Imalive]

Have you ever touched a female, someone you knew but were not in a relationship with somewhere non sexual like shoulder, elbow, hair, neck? I have, plenty of times, and usually because I can clearly see it's not unwanted nor immoral (she is single, of age etc). If I was mistaken and get a scowl or sharp rebuke or even a polite "please do not do that" - I would stop. To date that's never happened because usually it's clear she doesn't mind and/or is welcoming it. However to continue otherwise is clearly harassment.

Context does matter.

That's great that it's clear to you.
Maybe I live in Sodom and Gomorrah, but I've been to christian dating sites in Holland. And not only me, I heard it from some women there and my ex spoke a lot of women there when he was looking for one. He said they all said he was the only one they met who just took em to a restaurant and talked and tried nothing. The rest would immediately put their hand on their leg or whatever. Those were the decent ones btw. What I encountered mostly was they grab you in ze ... to see if you are willing.
In Norway they have a new law now that you must first ask before you do anything. I think that's good, cause a lot misunderstand. They think if you're nice to em or give a hug that means you want sex now.

 

[Stravinsk]

That's great that it's clear to you.
Maybe I live in Sodom and Gomorrah, but I've been to christian dating sites in Holland. And not only me, I heard it from some women there and my ex spoke a lot of women there when he was looking for one. He said they all said he was the only one they met who just took em to a restaurant and talked and tried nothing. The rest would immediately put their hand on their leg or whatever. Those were the decent ones btw. What I encountered mostly was they grab you in ze ... to see if you are willing.
In Norway they have a new law now that you must first ask before you do anything. I think that's good, cause a lot misunderstand. They think if you're nice to em or give a hug that means you want sex now.

It's clear to me because the persons in which this happens I get to know first and spend time with - not someone I just met. Even then, it's often the female that initiates in some subtle way with comments, looks, exposed wrists, questions and small talk, hair playing and any other number of indications that indicate interest and a green light. If she's stiff and rigid and can't even make eye contact, it's not likely I'm going to even extend my hand to shake hers, lol.