Sexual harassment: where is the line?

[Demon-Xanth]

I've heard many people that say pictures of "pinup" girls or even pictures of someone in "suggestive" poses posted at work can be called for sexual harassment. Yet wearing a bathing suit in public is perfectly acceptable.

Where is the line where a picture becomes "a beautiful picture" to "unacceptable"?

Also, is there a double standard with what women can get away with vs. men?

NOTE: please keep the flames down in this thread. Mods, feel free to lock if the flaming gets bad.

 

[fir3wir3]

I think the whole point that work is comfortable.

You work better and it causes less disputes at work...which again, increases productivity.

 

[StageLeft]

Yes, a big double standard.

The line is when you meet an oversensitive female and particularly crafty lawyer. If they tag team you get taken down.

I would recommend being overly conserative; don't have picture of ANYBODY in or around your work area.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

A big part of the concern is that I'm into anime, and there's alot of pictures that I really like due to the artistic qualities yet there is no line drawn to determine if a picture would be acceptable or not. And there is no standards explaining why one would be acceptable and one wouldn't.

 

[Harrisment]

Here! Did somebody call my name?

 

[Dameon]

Add to that most women would see no problem with the "humky firemen" calendar in the secretary's cubicle..... and it's a huge double standard.

 

[Regine]

Most people don't wear bathing suits at a professional setting i.e. work. But I do have to agree with you. There is a big double standard.
I think the problem is that people don't feel comfortable to say something if they are offended by a picture or words or whatever. It seems people can't simply ask the other person to stop it or take the picture down. I think it has to go both ways. I usually tolerate a lot of things, but if someone really says or does something that offends me I generally tell them to stop it. Of course this system only works if the other person would actually realize that they are offending people and stop it.
And btw "no" means "no"

I'm not sure how much sense that makes, I just got up, but there's my little rant for today

 

[FettsBabe]

There are three parts to the Sexual Harassment law:

1-Threats - A employee or applicant cannot be threatened by the employer/potential employer by him/her stating that they must have sex or a sex act to obtain the job.

2-Sexual Favoritism - An employer may not use sexual favors/sex acts to coerce someone by using job advancement or firing as the "tool" to get the person to perform sexually.

3-Third Party - It is wrong for a person/employer to allow sexually offending jokes on employer grounds. This uncludes telling jokes and an unsuspecting party overhears the joke. This rule also includes: calendars, mags, screensavors, etc.

BTW, even if the party accusing the other person of sexual harassment performs willingly and consents 100% it is still considered sexual harassment. Reasoning: they feel they must to keep their jobs or to keep things running smoothly.

**The point with the law is common sense: sex, sex acts, jokes, etc. should not be discussed at work. A man or woman should be allowed to work and not hear these things as they may find them offensive. Rule of thumb: there's a time and place for everything, and work is not the time nor place for this type of behavior.

 

[bigbootydaddy]

<< And btw &quot;no&quot; means &quot;no&quot; >>



LOL!

 

[vi edit]

I sure hope that no lawyer comes to my office.

I'm one man working around 12 women, I won't repeat what has been said to me a couple times when I was under a desk hooking up a computer

 

[Moogle]

While I respect the feelings of others, I feel that more effort should be made by the individual to adapt to the workplace, rather than the other way around. If you are the target of real harassment and want to end it, fine .. however, for the most part it just seems like a convenient and profitable axe to grind.

A parallel in my mind would be the racism laws.

Everyone is so busy and careful being PC, they're missing the point .. which is human nature. Apparently you have to watch everything you do and say nowadays... one false step with a considered friend and you offer your back to a thousand legal daggers.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Ok, so there is absolutly no line. I'm am going to throw out a couple of pictures that can be concievably boarderline, one I use as a background pic, the other I won't.

Picture 1
Picture 2

Am I being overly paranoid in deeming this boarderline, or would these definately be grounds for a &quot;sexual harassment&quot; claim?

...or are they boarderline?

 

[Dameon]

Demon, #1 may be an issue due to &quot;feeling threatened&quot;. Due to workplace violence incidents, some may find it objectionable. Check w/ management BEFORE posting. #2 I personally see no problem with.

 

[Moogle]

Two phrases that pay, literally.

&quot;Lack of tolerance, or understanding.&quot;

&quot;Greed.&quot;

If anyone thinks either would be objectionable personally to see as a colleagues wallpaper / screensaver etc, I really, REALLY wouldn't want to know that person socially. That's just nitpicking 'because they can' ... such people are often, to be frank, scum.

 

[FettsBabe]

#1 - As someone already stated - someone may find it threatening. Personally, I wouldn't. I would ask my employer about it.

#2 - SH - Yes. Its obvious that someone would post this for her &quot;body.&quot;

Personally I don't have a problem with either, but some people would.

 

[BoberFett]

Oh come on, as anybody can see in #1, that's not a gun, it's a Salad Shooter.

 

[skywhr]

I work in the back of my office, and two or three of us have women/anime on our desktop. Recently there was a sexual harrassment complaint put in. On my desktop was a blonde woman wearing a tight shirt and a bikini bottom, a fully clothed woman. Wheres the offense. The other guy had a anime chick in a bikini holding a surf board? The problem is there is no middle ground for this kind of complaint, If someone is uncomfortable with what I have on my computer they should let me know, I am more than willing to take it down. The complaint stated that something said person had seen on our sys admin's screen and in my area on multiple screens had offended said person. The way the complaint was worded caused a counter complaint for the terms said person used to describe said offenders. I guess you have to do what ya have to do to keep your job!

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Could anybody concievably complaing about this one?

(which I think should be the linux mascot )

 

[FettsBabe]

Demon-I doubt it. Its cute. I take it that you really like Jap animation?

As far as tight shirts and bikini's on your desktop. Management will say its not appropriate in the workplace.

Just to play devils advocate: could someone tell my why it is ok to have a girl in a bikini pictured on your desktop?

My point is: there is no reason to have it at work. Why would the pic be there? Probably because someone wants to drool over a pic (male or female). Thats why it is defined as #3 SH.

 

[AndrewR]

FettsBabe: Your description of sexual harrassment missed probably the most important aspect of current law and that which is most often litigated (you imply it, I think, but don't use the &quot;catch phrase&quot: &quot;hostile work environment&quot;. Fortunately, recent decisions in US appellate courts (two that I read a couple months ago) have restricted the doctrine a tad and raised the bar a little higher for the plaintiff to prove the &quot;hostility&quot;. However, the arguments surrounding pictures, jokes, lewd actions and such all encompass this aspect of harrassment as opposed to the &quot;quid pro quo&quot; of trading sex either for job security, a raise, or avoidance of disciplinary action.

Personally, I think the entire canon of harrassment law has merely served to chill workplace relationships between men and women and has adversely affected women in the workplace. While I am certainly in favor of ending the quid pro quo aspect, the &quot;hostile work environment&quot; just gets ridiculous at times. Since the lines are so fluid as to what is and is not harrassment under the vague guise of &quot;hostile work environment&quot;, employers are forced to be absolutely draconian in their approach to male/female interaction -- I wouldn't be surprised to see segregated companies in the near future (men in this building, women in this one). If you compliment someone for the way they look (innocently enough and in a polite and decent manner), you can be warned or even fired if they really felt like strictly adhering to their policies. I have a picture of Natalie Portman as my desktop wallpaper, and my boss (a woman) commented on it -- it's absolutely tasteful with the only skin showing being her face and hands! Why that should even remotely enter the realm of question is beyond me (I still have it up and will not take it down, wasn't asked to).

My mantra is that the legal system lacks common sense. There is no justice in our justice system -- it's obssessed with technicalities and obscure rules and procedures so that the monopoly of the legal profession is maintained. Keep it opaque, and you need lawyers. Make it simple and straightforward, and suddenly lawyers are not so important anymore.

And people wonder why laws get more and more bizarre every year.

 

[AndrewR]

Oh, and the answer to the question, &quot;Where is the line?&quot;

It's however your employer wishes to define it within the context of the law. Consult your company's policy (and quote it for us if you doubts). In all likelihood, your company's policy is more restrictive than the law calls for simply to protect themselves from liability. Ours, for example, basically says that anything the company wants to define as harrassment is harrassment.

 

[Thorn]

Ok, here's one for you toolgirl... and remember, I've changed a lot sense then and absolutely wouldn't behave like this now.

When I was 17 I was dating this girl that had a bit of a &quot;reputation&quot;, she wasn't a skeeze but she did like to have fun. Anyway, I go by and pick her up and we go to the movies, dinner, etc then we go to this private area to chat and &quot;park&quot;. After a little chit-chat and general &quot;friendliness&quot; we get down to some kissing (she was an awesome kisser BTW). After a while things get a bit more intense and I'm starting to get a little... ummm... excited. So I slip my hand under her blouse. Well, she then says &quot;no&quot;. Being the decent person I am, I pull my hand back out. I was thinking, &quot;at least the kissing is pretty good and I am having a good time&quot;. After a while things had completely died down and for the next half hour she starts acting really annoyed and figured that I'd went too far with the groping thing. At that point it was starting to get late so I decided to take her back home. We said &quot;good night&quot; (I could tell she was still mad) and I drove off feeling like a complete jerk. The next Monday at school (our date had been on Fri night), I find out from a close female friend that the girl I'd went out with was mad because &quot;I didn't act like a man and take what I wanted&quot;. Well, I confronted her about this later that day and sure enough she said, &quot;Don't you know anything? I'm supposed to say no, but that doesn't mean you have to stop&quot;. I left without saying a word and just sat in the library in shock... at any rate, I can see how people get confused and where the miscommunication about &quot;no&quot; come into play. I'm not condoning bad behavior in dating, but sometimes girls are known to send mixed signals and that complicates things quite a bit.

But, no is no guys... unless she says no and then jumps on you.

 

[AndrewR]

Something along the lines of: No means no unless it means yes. Eh, Thorn?

Again, we're trying to evaluate women as rational creatures. Heehee. j/k, ladies.

 

[Regine]

Thorn,
It is girls that send mixed signals like that, that make it very difficult for men to understand when no really means no and when the girl is just playing around. I think that's a lot of sexual harassment problems come from, simply because there are so many mixed signals around.
When I say no - it means &quot;no&quot;. (Napalm has a few problems understanding that some times ) I mean, it can be fun to play around and act hesitant to advances, but my b/f generally understands when I'm doing that and when I really just don't wanna do anything.

I can understand how perplexed you must have felt, Thorn. I never said that we women make it easy for you guys

 

[Demon-Xanth]

Ok, I'm gonna lighten up the mood and say something that I heard a while back:

&quot;I'm all for equal rights, if guys can go around topless I don't see why women shouldn't be allowed to&quot;