211–220 of 279 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Read my paragraph one? "The big difference is these women had no power over my career."
I think your comment is thoughtful and relates to your experience. Once again, I can't understand why it is downvoted... HN quirks, that's what I call it.
> In the span of a week, I went from feeling excited and motivated about my job to feeling lethargic, anxious, and unenthused. (...) I was kissed on the cheek, asked to sit on my manager’s lap, told about my manager’s sex life and virility (...) There exists a breed of narcissists who are so incapable of tolerating rejection that they will consistently ignore every sign of it. In fact, the less you are satisfied with…
I am member of a minority, and have had more than one chance to go to the HR to report "being racially abused" and present the narrative in such a way that anyone would be convinced it was horrible. Firstly, what happened to her is definitely misconduct, but not sexual harassment. I get the impression that the "victim" here is trying to take advantage of the situation. She never asks the inappropriate person to stop…
Perhaps you do not understand what "sexual harassment" constitutes in typical usage, then.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You feel like she is lacking self confidence??? That is just about the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. Her manager (aka 'someone with a disproportionate amount of control over her career') asked her to sit on his lap, talked about how 'everyone' has an Asian fetish at some point, and asked her out for dinner alone. She tolerated it up to a point and then went to HR. How in any possible sense of the term can t…
I'm trying to understand the behavior of the manager, there must be a rational explanation. He knew what it can lead him to. So for me, it may be that he was sexually attracted to her and she may not have shown enough rejection signs (cultural bias between the 2?). Also I may point that for me the only person in charge for my carrer is me, whatever is my position.
That lack of awareness doesn't excuse it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing the word "when" between the second and third of those lines. The third line restricts the scope of the second.
Which is why I quoted the third point, as it covers both the OP and the Women In Tech survey It would be an extremely narrow definition to attempt to carve out unwanted sexual advances, especially from a superior, in a workplace not being sexual harassment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You feel like she is lacking self confidence??? That is just about the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. Her manager (aka 'someone with a disproportionate amount of control over her career') asked her to sit on his lap, talked about how 'everyone' has an Asian fetish at some point, and asked her out for dinner alone. She tolerated it up to a point and then went to HR. How in any possible sense of the term can t…
I'm trying to understand the behavior of the manager, there must be a rational explanation. He knew what it can lead him to. So for me, it may be that he was sexually attracted to her and she may not have shown enough rejection signs (cultural bias between the 2?). Also I may point that for me the only person in charge for my carrer is me, whatever is my position.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well I'm a married heterosexual man, so the universe of "hot guys I like" is pretty small. And I don't know why you insist on continuing to argue against points I'm not making. I'm saying continued unwanted advances = harassment, regardless of the existence or lack of "clear rejection." If you flirt with someone at work (what exactly are you being paid to do?) and they reciprocate, it's not unwanted. If you do it onc…
So it's not the act that's harassment, it's the relative level of attractiveness of the person committing the act. Interesting.
> I'm saying continued unwanted advances = harassment
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Your mother was a victim too. Only in your mind, not in hers.
And also according to the dictionary, which defines the word "victim" as: "One who is harmed by or made to suffer under a circumstance or condition: e.g. victims of war; victims of an epidemic; victims of poverty." Unless you believe she enjoyed the attentions of men, that is. In which case you would be correct.
2. I find it somewhere between amusing and horrifying that you compare war, epidemic and poverty to someone grabbing your ass at work. They are different by at least one order of magnitude.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What happened next was that the offender moved on to someone else, and when they found someone who wasn't so confident as your mother, sexually assaulted her. Uh, no, but I can see how your expectations have been molded to believe this is the only possible "thing that happened next". > but you should be careful that people don't accidentally think that you're ascribing blame to the victim. No accident. The "victim"…
"No accident. The "victim" shares the responsibility of standing up for themselves. This culture of victimhood has helped no one but Tumblr." A sexual harassment is analogous to a situation where a person hits another person, the other person fails to duck/block and gets hit in the face. I really can't see how the victim could be responsible for getting hurt. The fact that some people have practiced the art of boxing…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, your view is not valid. Assuming you actually read the article, you probably didn't read this part: "In that week, I was kissed on the cheek, asked to sit on my manager’s lap, told about my manager’s sex life and virility, and told that “all men go through an Asian fetish at some time,” among other wildly discomfiting, work-inappropriate things. Then I was asked to dinner alone." That racist comment alone is reas…
Help me understand how it's not appropriate to directly tell someone who is making it obvious that they are attracted to you that you aren't interested. If you make it known that you aren't interested and the person continues. Then it becomes harassment. So I refute your position. We all have to set boundaries in our relationships and the author of the article is no exception.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed; never trust HR to do the right thing. HR will choose the approach they believe minimizes risk to the company. If they believe kicking you out instead of your harasser is less risky they won't hesitate twice to do so. I can confirm that from personal experience. If you can afford it get legal advice first ... and then go to HR.
As a note: the above comments advice is probably specific to the US. In the UK, for instance, terminating someone for reporting sexual harassment is a very good way of losing a lot of money at a subsequent Employee Tribunal and getting your company fined. There's a lot of great precedent for siding with the reporter, even if other flimsy reasons are given for their termination. However, the point made is a correct on…
If your case is as clear-cut as the one in this article you might indeed not need a lawyer but if there's any wiggle room; if it's discrimination and not harassment and the accused is sufficiently important to the company and HR judges that you might not have the energy to file a lawsuit etc. etc. etc. then it's still very easy to end up getting kicked out of the company.