Sexual harassment

[Joven]

It would be nice, but not all states are caught up to the problem, and it's an international problem at that. Many of these laws are misdemeanors at best. So I doubt anyone would be going to prison for that. That's why I said someone's statement earlier was a strawman - using the assumption that everything being discussed here is prosecutable by law. Or that we're discussing "the past" (which I don't even know why that should have been part of the discussion).

Wow, you completely misinterpreted what I posted. Nowhere did I say that things on here are prosecutable by law. I said that it isn't up to us, the people on this forum or any social media platform, to be the ones to prosecute or persecute people for their actions. That we are not law enforcers, which is what some people were suggesting: that we police ourselves and pass judgement on those who are accused of something, be it harassment or simply being a dick. Also, I wasn't saying you were discussing "the past". You said you were discussing the topic of this post ie: the PC Gamer article and sexual harassment in general. What I said about that was that your (and generally everyone's, not trying to single you out) "discussion" wasn't solving anything, all anyone was doing was having circular arguments and petty back-and-forths without getting anywhere. I suggested that if anyone really wanted to help people with harassment on this post then they should post signs of potential harassment situations and the steps to avoid them, personal stories about overcoming abuse/harassment, etc. Endless debating the "should'ves", "could'ves", "would'ves" and "maybes" doesn't help anyone.

[Zsolen]

I suggested that if anyone really wanted to help people with harassment on this post then they should post signs of potential harassment situations and the steps to avoid them, personal stories about overcoming abuse/harassment, etc. Endless debating the "should'ves", "could'ves", would'ves and maybes doesn't help anyone.

Can you explain these bolded parts? They seem contradictory, but perhaps they are references to different things.

[Zsolen]

I'm sorry but I really can't agree with the idea that people must stop doing something that is absolutely okay to do because other people are, to put it lightly, jerks.

Oh you can, but there is a significant chance it will land you in hot water. That's why you shouldn't.

[MoroMurasaki]

I'm sorry but I really can't agree with the idea that people must stop doing something that is absolutely okay to do because other people are, to put it lightly, jerks.

There is nothing morally wrong with a lot of behaviors that are dangerous or stupid.

Walking alone at night, getting really drunk without someone to look out for you, having a one night stand, having unprotected sex... none of those things are morally or legally wrong. All of them open the door for you to get really hurt despite their amorality. Sending nudes is no different.

Blackmail and extortion are already (rightfully) demonized and can land you in legal trouble. There is no point in focusing on the perpetrators of those crimes because the legal system has that part covered. Since sending nudes is not illegal and there is no systematic detrimemt to doing so should the social focus not be on this half of the equation for now? Educating people about the risks inherent to their irresponsible behavior isn't a bad thing, it's attacking the same problem from another side.

To be very clear I have seen this happen in real life. My sister sent multiple pictures to a guy she was seeing and when they broke up he logged into her facebook and posted them all, tagging as many people in them as he could including our grandmother. As much as I wish for horrible, awful things to happen to that man he could never have done this if she didn't do a few silly-yet-not-immoral things like sharing those pictures and a common password she used for a lot of things.

It's not about people "must stop" sending nudes it's about how you are responsible for your own safety and happiness. If you callously disregard logic and reason and get hurt then perhaps you should have thought about what you were doing a bit more.

[Joven]

stuff I agree with

As someone who used to refuse to take responsibility for a lot of my own stupid actions when I was younger I agree 100% with this. It might be a bit callous for me to say this, but sometimes you have to pay a heavy price for even the smallest mistakes in order to learn valuable lessons. Hopefully you can learn them early enough that you can have time to rebuild any social/familial damage that may be incurred. Take responsibility for your actions, no matter how small. You'll come out much better in the long run.

[Elamys]

If you callously disregard logic and reason and get hurt then perhaps you should have thought about what you were doing a bit more.

Mm, sorry, but no.

Also, let's consider how often victims of this type of crime (sexual harassment or abuse) just get this exact type of response: "why weren't you more careful?"

There are a lot of numbers and studies out there that prove the perpetrators of these crimes don't get punished on near the same level as the perpetrators of other crimes because the legal system thinks the same way you do in regards to this topic, that the onus should have been on the victim, or at least more on the victim. It's nice that you believe in the law but the law isn't working. We need a cultural shift that doesn't focus so much on the victims that did nothing wrong.

[Melichoir]

Mm, sorry, but no.

Also, let's consider how often victims of this type of crime (sexual harassment or abuse) just get this exact type of response: "why weren't you more careful?"

There are a lot of numbers and studies out there that prove the perpetrators of these crimes don't get punished on near the same level as the perpetrators of other crimes because the legal system thinks the same way you do in regards to this topic, that the onus should have been on the victim, or at least more on the victim. It's nice that you believe in the law but the law isn't working. We need a cultural shift that doesn't focus so much on the victims that did nothing wrong.

The one whos probably in teh wrong here is you. Let me give you this as food for thought:



Should we feel sorry for you if you decide to deck yourself out in designer clothes, gold and jewels, stuff huge wads of cash in your pockets, and visit the darker side of a major city at 2 in teh morning, screaming at the top of your lungs about how expensive the stuff you have is and how much cash you have, and then what happens is someone mugs you.

Yes, the mugger is still responsible for the crime. It is their fault. But choosing to throw caution to the wind and not use any sense of reason or logic is on you.

Im not saying that people who get abused or taken advantage of are that extreme, nor that most are likely people getting swindled in similar fashion, but rather that its a stupid approach to say "Hey, do whatever you want, there are no consequences. If anything happens to you, youll never have any responsibility to bear for it happening." That just creates more victims by giving people a false sense of security and a lack of accountability.

And funny, I think that there's this terrible idea that having 'responsibility' for what happens to you is somehow akin to 'victim blaming.' Its not. Educating yourself, using pragmatism, and being very aware of what some actions may lead to is a hell of a lot more useful to a person and protecting themselves from harm. As an example, If you go to a frat party and you choose to get black out drunk and someone takes advantage of you, yeah that person is a PoS and scum and should be thrown off a cliff, but that doesnt excuse you from the fact that you participated in an activity that robbed you of your own agency and awareness. This isnt victim blaming, this is telling a person to be aware of the choices they make can have some pretty serious consequences. We should have compassion for victims, but make sure that its apparent that what lead to the terrible thing is addressed to. To give thsi context separated from harassment and the like, think about this: If you choose not to wear a seatbelt, if someone runs a red and slams into you, do you think people will tell you "Oh its not your fault. Its all on the guy who ran the red light. All the injury and suffering was their fault?" Most likely youre oging to hear people say "Yeah that guy ran a red, and its his fault, but why werent you wearing a seat belt too?"

Its not victim blaming to make sure people are aware of how they get to that point. Its making sure that people dont repeat the same mistake.


Also, if anything, I would hate to live in a world where the victim determines justice. Your view of the judicial system is flawed. It works on the premise "Innocent until proven guilty." That means that an accusation alone isnt justifiable enough cause to convict a person. Evidence must be given. And given things like harassment or even rape, those are objectively harder crimes to prove occurred, unfortunately. However, the idea youre advocating is "Guilty until proven innocent." Its based on the thought that the victim would never make up false accusations, and pushes the burden of proof unto the accused. And if its hard enough to convict on things like rape, imagine having to prove you didnt rape someone.

[MoroMurasaki]

Mm, sorry, but no.

Also, let's consider how often victims of this type of crime (sexual harassment or abuse) just get this exact type of response: "why weren't you more careful?"

There are a lot of numbers and studies out there that prove the perpetrators of these crimes don't get punished on near the same level as the perpetrators of other crimes because the legal system thinks the same way you do in regards to this topic, that the onus should have been on the victim, or at least more on the victim. It's nice that you believe in the law but the law isn't working. We need a cultural shift that doesn't focus so much on the victims that did nothing wrong.

Maybe don't try to be smarmy and condescending when your post relies on you being unable to understand mine. When you have any reputable statistics to show for this maybe you can attempt it as an argument.

Let's be clear as well - there is a difference between something being amoral and being inconsequential. Sending nude photos of yourself has no moral context as long as it's done between two consenting adults but it doesn't mean there won't be consequences to your actions. It seems like perhaps you don't understand the difference there.

I would never argue that legal action should be taken against the women in the TMP story who sent nudes to the accused, what he may or may not have done with them is 100% on his own shoulders, but you can't argue that they played no role in giving him the power to extort and blackmail them - they did, they made the conscious decision to send those photos. Acknowledging that they have made a stupid decision in no way diminishes his guilt in abusing that.

But you just stick your fingers in your ears and ignore logic, it's worked well for you up to this point.

[QT_Melon]

It's too bad that people only want to keep sticking to the photos aspect when there are the issues that the accused was doing behavior to a string of women. I guess we should blame the women giving out nudes because OBVIOUSLY he would have behaved himself otherwise I guess..

[Elamys]

When you have any reputable statistics to show for this maybe you can attempt it as an argument.

If you want statistics and information, then here's plenty for you.

Psychology Today has a pretty good article about why victims of harassment frequently don't speak up sooner ( https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...forward-sooner )

This sense of shame often causes victims to blame themselves for the sexual misconduct of their perpetrator. Case in point, Lee Corfman, the woman who reported to a Washington Post reporter that she was molested by Roy Moore when she was 14, said, “I felt responsible. I thought I was bad.” Time after time, clients who experienced sexual harassment at work or at school have told me things like: “I assumed it was my fault. I’m a very friendly person, and I always smiled and said hello to my boss. I think he must have thought I was flirting with him.” Another client, a student who was sexually assaulted by one of her college professors told me, “I liked all the attention I was getting from him. We’d sit for hours in his office talking, and I was learning a lot from him. I guess I was sending him the wrong message.”

The New York Times did a good writeup on reasons why people doubt harassment and sexual misconduct cases (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/u...ein-women.html) The reasons they have given are: they didn't act like a victim, they stayed friendly with their abuser, they didn't come forward right away, their story doesn't "add up," and they didn't fight back.

In relation specifically to sexual assault, MCASA's report on why survivors often don't report cites that it is often not reported because they believe it is not important enough, among a wide variety of other reasons. Only 9 percent of the perpetrators of sexual assault will ever be prosecuted. (https://ocrsm.umd.edu/files/Why-Is-S...r-Reported.pdf)

Vox did a really fantastic writeup on the prevalence of sexual harassment in the workplace (https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/...rassment-facts) citing a number of different studies, including the EEOC's 2016 study on sexual harassment (https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/task_force...oad/report.pdf) which found that 75 percent of workplace harassment victims experienced retaliation upon reporting.

A lot of this underreporting comes down to a fear of retaliation from the employers or colleagues. Victims often fear they won’t be believed, or will receive blame or be subject to professional retaliation — like being fired from their jobs.

Culture Amp, a website about workplace culture, reported on an Australian Human Rights Commission survey that found only 20% of harassment victims reported (https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites...on%20Final.pdf). CA interviewed the provider of a whistleblowing service for more information as to why victims don't report (https://blog.cultureamp.com/why-dont...ual-harassment).

Luker concedes this is still a common and open question. “Some of the headline reasons are a lack of support and protection,” he says. “People may not feel comfortable speaking up when there's a lack of robust policies, procedural rigor or reporting frameworks. Also, when there's a perceived or actual lack of consequences, lack of commitment from leaders or the feeling the perpetrator won't get caught because there won’t be a thorough investigation, people don’t feel safe reporting wrongdoing.”

Luker and the Your Call team have also seen people be held back by feelings of personal guilt about the incident, feelings that they somehow caused or contributed to the behavior of the perpetrator.

NBC News did another writeup concerning the physical and mental effects of not only harassment itself but also of reporting it (https://www.nbcnews.com/better/healt...ent-ncna810416)

Dr. Cullen adds that the feelings of shame or guilt that a person may feel when sexually harassed at work can devastate their self-esteem and sense of self-worth as a professional.

“They may feel that they did something to make this happen or egg it on in some way,” says Cullen.

...and on and on and on.

It only seems to be in cases of harassment and abuse that people are keen to lean on the "innocent until proven guilty" line (which only matters in an actual court, by the way, not the court of public opinion). I'm not going to sit here and say that you're not allowed to be skeptical, but that same skepticality should be applied equally to all crimes, and it just isn't. Referring back to the NYT article from earlier:

Partly this is because of widespread misconceptions. The public and the police vastly overestimate the incidence of false reports: The most solid, case-by-case examinations say that only 5 to 7 percent of sexual assault reports are false.

The Independent also did a good article on this subject of false reports (https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a8077876.html) which cites that the UK's Home Office found that only 4% of reports of sexual violence were found to be false.

TLDR: Victims already feel personal guilt; they already feel that they did something wrong; and when the perpetrators of abuse and harassment see that reports of such are overwhelmingly met with "why did you do X when you knew Y would happen" they may feel empowered to act this way because they think they won't face any repercussions for their actions. Victims don't falsely report any more than they do for any other crime; you're campaigning against an issue that doesn't exist and rubbing salt in the wounds victims already have.

Are you close to that victim? Did that victim ask for your help or your opinion? No? Then you don't need to talk about "what they could have done different."