Sexual harassment

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by timojin, Nov 21, 2017.

  1. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    THANKS . I the opposite sex, I am married for 22, 15 and 20 years. First two died and I am proud man chauvinist pig. I would not like to be without them.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    Clearly that isn't true. A lot of the "low level" offenses that we've been hearing about lately - unwanted comments, touching, etc. - are not intentional wrongdoing. They think, "she should be flattered to get attention from somebody as important as me." Unfortunately, your attitude only encourages men to think that if they're not trying to hurt her it's okay.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,100
    clearly your reply was dishonest. you really are buying your own bullshit that unwanted comments and touching is flattering and they don't know it's intentional wrongdoing? you think the perpetrator is that stupid?

    that's simply megalomania and abusing their power. just the fact they don't even try to find out if it's wanted or not is evidence of that truth. the flattery is a lie that the perpetrator uses in their own mind. your reply makes no sense at all. all you are doing is making up bs and and really reaching to excuse it.

    my attitude is not encouraging men to do squat. they will do what they do. as if it's my responsibility. what an asshole.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    Yes.

    Yes.

    Yes. If they knew what they were doing was wrong, they wouldn't have to lie to themselves, would they?
     
  8. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,100
    • Please do not flame other members
    are you a psychopath? do you realize that statement is not even logical? you have it backwards, you weasel. if they do know that it's wrong, then they would have to lie to themselves to justify their actions by telling themselves it's wanted, wouldn't they? see how that works?

    you are trying the wrong person, asshole. i'm not naive. try your bullshit with someone else.
     
  9. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,387
    It sounds like you're acting dumb on purpose.

    The thread was only to be a provocation in the first place, wasn't it?
     
  10. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,623
    Well many women are very tolerant.

    Seriously, it is extraordinary to encounter in the c.21st a person who thinks that men are so predatory that they will - by nature - force their attention on unwilling women and that if women don't like that they should change how they dress. This is Borat-think.
     
  11. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,189
    ^^^
    Not so extraordinary for me. People point to women wearing short skirts and/or low necklines & tell me they are asking to be raped.

    <>
     
  12. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,623
    Aha, that's an old one, is it not?

    It seems to me that a man or woman dressing sexily is drawing attention to themselves and must expect to be looked at. We've all come across people dressed like that and thought, "Blimey that doesn't leave much to the imagination." or equivalent. But being looked at is rather different from being raped - or groped or propositioned or whatever.
     
  13. timojin Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,252
    http://az.newser.com/story/251507/women-lawyers-sue-to-stop-masturbating-inmates.html

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    allanswart/iStock/Thinkstock(COOK COUNTY, Ill.) -- Hundreds of women employed with the public defender's office in Cook County, Illinois have filed a class-action lawsuit alleging that the public defender and sheriff conspired in their refusal to stop the daily occurrence of sexual assaults by detainees.

    The lawsuit alleges an ordeal suffered by female employees due to the detainees’ actions and a policy that rewarded alleged repeat abusers with pizza if they stopped – a step that the suit says only increased the problem.

    Female public defenders and law clerks in the County lockup endure "daily abuses" from detainees, including masturbation in their presence, "verbal threats laden with explicit sexual violence, exposure of detainees' genitals, and physical attacks," according to a press release by Chicago-based employment law firm Potter Bolaños LLC.

    The incidents occur in holding areas in each of the courthouses in Cook County as well as the Cook County jail, according to court documents.

    What do you think , will they be potential predators ?
    There are thousands of jail in the world.
    On the outside of prisons there are millions of well dressed and well educated men doing just that as men in jail, why porno movi and store exist.
     
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,193
    Had you done some research, you would have found out that the prisons in Cook County sees this happen more often than in other counties. In other words, it is more prevalent there than elsewhere. And these prisoners aren't masturbating to porn. They are exposing themselves to female staff and female lawyers, and masturbating to these women, sometimes even on them. I mean, you do understand the difference between wanking to porn and dropping your pants in front of a non consenting woman and wanking off at her or even on her while threatening her with rape, yes?

    In Cook County, female staff and visiting lawyers are not just sexually harassed, they are also sexually threatened, often with male guards accompanying them, they are also physically assaulted. You would also have found out that the Sheriff running the prisons in Cook County gave the female defense lawyers an option to stop it and that would have entailed curtailing the prisoner's constitutional rights by denying them the right to appear in court.. They know the female lawyers will be forced to refuse that offer, for obvious reasons.

    Other counties also encounter this form of harassment of female staff and visiting lawyers, and they counter it be acting immediately to stop it and the prisoners who behave this way, are placed in isolation and sometimes physically restrained when they try to get physical with the female staff or lawyers.

    None of that happens in Cook County. So not only are the prisoners to blame for their behaviour, the Sheriff is also to blame for literally allowing it to happen and doing nothing to stop or prevent prisoners from behaving this way.

    But you know, that's dealing with reality. Heaven forbid you actually address this topic in good faith.
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    If that isn't hitting the nail fair square on the head, then I don't know what is!!!
     
  16. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,623
    These people are in jail. By what bizarre process of reasoning do you think they should be taken as representative of civilised social attitudes?

    See also the reply from Bells, which demonstrates that this is exceptional even for a prison and more likely than not the outcome of a brutalising prison regime in which civilised behaviour is not enforced.

    Lastly, I think you are now trolling. Even you cannot really be so stupid as to fail to see the difference between watching a blue movie - or otherwise indulging sexual fantasies - in private, and jerking off in public, specifically to disgust and humiliate the object of your attention.
     
  17. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,387
    Creating fear, walking home alone at night with no lights...
     
  18. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,623
    Yes, no doubt that, too.
     
  19. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,236
    Yeah, I thought about that.

    But it is, when all is said and done, in the rules:

    "Members should abide by basic standards of good manners and courtesy when addressing other members. "
    http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sciforums-site-rules.142880/

    Anyway, I will withdraw. There wouldn't be much I could say except to reiterate what others are saying, just less gratuitously insulting.
     
  20. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,236
    Sorry. just saw this. I'll address it, and then let y'all carry on.
    Every time.

    Giving a thread starter of the benefit of the doubt (yes, even when we personally have little doubt) costs us nothing.
    The idea is to have as short a memory as possible, so as not to poison-the-well of a given discussion.
    Consider that Tim is not the only one reading this. Others will read too. The otherwise pure discussion is being corrupted by undo attention to the issuer rather than the issue.

    (And it's what I've been trying to do with you. I try to treat you as having no history, so that it does not colour my responses with subjectivity).

    Let him first actually commit the crime - that of being explicitly belligerent after having been shown the answer.
    That way, SciFo is better for it, rather than worse.

    And again, it is in the rules. We should prolly pay lip service to the rules before we deign to slag others.

    :steps off soapbox:
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,647
    In essence obviously you are correct, and certainly have far more integrity saying that then one or two other hypocrites.
     
  22. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,752
    Yeah, we know, Dave. Whatever it takes. Sounds about right.

    Tell me, why do you need an environment in which everyone is customarily retarded?

    No, seriously:

    Right. Do you think there is some technicality to be exploited, so that one can present an offensively stupid topic post to the community without actually addressing anyone? Why is it that your outlook on the rules seems to require the extraordinary accommodation of willfully antisocial behavior?

    I get that some want others to have as short of memory as possible so that the some never have to change their behavior, but, y'know, if you don't see why others find that standard problematic, seriously, there's not much to ease your worries.

    The difference about your argument to, "Let him first actually commit the crime", functionally comes down to waiting for him to first commit a different offense.
     
  23. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,022
    But they don't know that it's "wrong", so they don't have to lie to themselves.

    There's a whole spectrum of inappropriate behavior, from jokes that make some people uncomfortable all the way up to groping and beyond. It makes no sense to insist that everybody who tells a joke is a sexual predator. What's "wrong" is not absolute. It's a social convention and social conventions are changing. The people who are slow to catch up with the rest of society aren't necessarily doing it on purpose.
     

Share This Page