Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, December 28, 2017

The victims of sexual harassment who have recently come forward are far from alone: Nearly half of women say they have experienced some form of it at work at least once in their careers. But there has been little research about those responsible. In a new survey, about a third of men said they had done something at work within the past year that would qualify as objectionable behavior or sexual harassment. The survey -- the result of a collaboration between The New York Times, leading sexual harassment researchers and the polling and media company Morning Consult -- was nationally representative of men who work full time.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

The most common type of action is what researchers call gender harassment. This includes telling crude jokes or stories and sharing inappropriate videos. About 25 percent of men in the survey said they had done at least one of these things.

Another category is unwanted sexual attention: actions like touching, making comments about someone's body and asking colleagues on dates after they've said no. About 10 percent of men reported such behavior. Least common is sexual coercion, which includes pressuring people into sexual acts by offering rewards or threatening retaliation. Two percent of men said they had done such a thing recently.

Some men were probably unwilling to tell the truth in the survey. But the results captured just how many admitted to some form of harassing behavior.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

How many men didn't do any of those things but pretend they did so that they wouldn't be called gay? There is also a culture that requires men to be sexists just to fit in. In all my working life I've never had a problem working with men and in response to that I already know it will come from those who claim I was just unattractive. I know better but I just did not flirt with men and then expect them not to come on to me. We are ignoring the other side of the story which I feel guilty being the one to bring it up. Women do lot's of things to bring sexual attention to themselves, to make themselves feel attractive, we should not be ignoring that half of the equation. We have entered into a McCarthylike era, this will not end well. Careers are being destroyed, great politicians are being sidelined and to pretend that the females are totally innocent is nonsense.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-28 08:40 AM | Reply

This includes telling crude jokes or stories and sharing inappropriate videos.

Does this count if you work in an all male workplace? If so I'm guilty but given that there are only 3 women in our company and none in my department they have not been subjected to any of my crude humor unless someone else in my department passed it on to them.

#2 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2017-12-28 08:54 AM | Reply

#2 good point. I hadn't thought of that.

#3 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 08:59 AM | Reply

How is telling a crude joke harassment? Is simply talking about sex harassment? If I tell a friend/co-worker that I had sex with my wife last night and 2 other co-workers, one male, one female, hear me, is it only harassment to the woman?

#4 | Posted by TFDNihilist at 2017-12-28 09:42 AM | Reply

#4 Yes it is.

#5 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 10:07 AM | Reply

See Monty Python's treatment of the topic: [[https://youtu.be/ejaWq2TXRXE]]

#6 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 10:09 AM | Reply

In my life. I have complimented women in my workplace on their appearance.

Do I have to resign now?

#7 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2017-12-28 10:35 AM | Reply

#7 It's not acceptable. Effective retroactively.

Not being sarcastic in any of this.

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 10:57 AM | Reply

If I smiled at women who didn't smile back, is that harassment?
And if it was the other way around, is it still harassment (on my part)?

#9 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-12-28 12:50 PM | Reply

Collegiality is encouraged Sentinel. Leering is not.

#10 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 12:53 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

You realize all this over reaction will lead to the coddling of women ... exactly the opposite of what feminist were fighting for...

The Current Sex Panic Harks Back to the Era of Coddling Women
www.bloomberg.com

#11 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-12-28 01:00 PM | Reply

Will there be a test on all of this?

#12 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-12-28 01:09 PM | Reply

Keep asking stupid questions. If we get ten, I'll send you to the special Ed classroom to take it where you feel most comfortable.

#13 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 01:13 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

How is telling a crude joke harassment? Is simply talking about sex harassment? If I tell a friend/co-worker that I had sex with my wife last night and 2 other co-workers, one male, one female, hear me, is it only harassment to the woman?
#4 | Posted by TFDNihilist

One of my former employer's clients was a municipality. I had a meeting with the mayor of the town. He got a call from a female reporter. When he was on the phone with her he looked at me and started making ------- moves. This was a guy I had met like twice. I am in no way a prude but I found it offensive and disgusting. Especially the assumption of familiarity. But what was I to do about it?

#14 | Posted by truthhurts at 2017-12-28 01:21 PM | Reply

Commenting on the appearance of others can go wrong. If they do good work, tell them. It doesn't matter if they look good in those jeans.

#15 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-28 01:35 PM | Reply

"Keep asking stupid questions"

If a synchronized swimmer drowns, do the others drown as well?

#16 | Posted by sentinel at 2017-12-28 10:57 PM | Reply

Does this count if you work in an all male workplace?

Or what about if said jokes were thought to be funny by female coworkers?

I've made crude jokes and made crude comments around female coworkers so I could technically answer "yes" on this type of survey.

Problem is, they laughed at said jokes or comments and have made similar jokes/comments as well.

Does that mean I've been harassed? Should I feel violated and demand the perpetrators be brought to justice?

Or should we all just slow down a bit and be adults about this?

#17 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 02:42 AM | Reply

#4 Yes it is.

#5 | Posted by BruceBanner

That's absurd.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 02:43 AM | Reply

#7 It's not acceptable. Effective retroactively.

Not being sarcastic in any of this.

#8 | Posted by BruceBanner

Jesus H man.

That you'd make such a broad decision without any knowledge of the relationship or context is sad.

Stop being such a follower and thing a bit.

#19 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 02:46 AM | Reply

I'll send you to the special Ed classroom to take it where you feel most comfortable.

#13 | Posted by BruceBanner

You don't get to show an unthinking, shallow ass level of analysis of this topic while claiming others belong in the special ed class.

#20 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 02:48 AM | Reply

#20 to be honest, you're the one being flippant here.

Take your joke example. They may have laughed along even though they were mortified. They may have laughed because they were worried that they would make you upset by not laughing.

Often, people will laugh when they're uncomfortable. Would you know the difference?

#21 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 09:22 AM | Reply

Jesus H man.
That you'd make such a broad decision without any knowledge of the relationship or context is sad.
Stop being such a follower and thing a bit.

#19 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2017-12-29 02:46 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

The comment was in response to Whiskey sarcastically saying that he comments on the appearance of women.

There are a few issues here:
1. Everyone is sensitive about their appearance. The young want to look older, the skinny want to be bigger, the fat want to be slimmer, the old want to be younger, the exotic want to be unremarkable, the unremarkable want to be exotic.
2. Your appearance should have little to do with your work performance. If it is a workplace, then it's irrelevant.
3. Why does anyone think others want them to be commenting on their appearance? Unless they are asking you, you don't know.
4. Comments about appearance are biased by what you believe is the appropriate look for others. That opinion may not be common.
5. The workplace has traditionally been set up to avoid differences in appearance. So have many schools. Uniforms, suits, professional attire, are all designed to level the appearance of everyone and allow everyone to focus on the work. Respect that and everyone can feel comfortable working.

Those are just some broadly applicable rules on commenting on appearances.

#22 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 09:33 AM | Reply

I think Sentinel was joking about #4 but you don't see it that way? That's TMI man. The Monty Python skit takes that one on in the 70s? 80s? It's not new. Intimate details are not appropriate for work. Sentinel made another silly comment later. He's being a little sarcastic.

#23 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 09:36 AM | Reply

Sexual Jokes And Lewd Conversations In The Workplace: Where's The Line? www.forbes.com

#24 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 10:10 AM | Reply

It's a professional standard, not me being a prude.

#25 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 10:11 AM | Reply

Shortly after the attacks on 9/11, an Admin Assistant in a company I worked for threatened a fellow employee with calling the FBI to report him as a threat after a silly argument they had. He reminded her that every time she lit up a cigarette she was damaging her unborn child. He was Pakistani and had recently become a US Citizen.

She wasnt kidding.

I sincerely believe that she would file a false Sexual Harassment complaint and laugh about it.

Let the games begin.

Not all allegations are created equal.

#26 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2017-12-29 10:16 AM | Reply

I don't disagree OWS. I'm not in Snoofy's camp on that one. I posted the teacher article showing two X chromosomes don't make an angel.

#27 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 10:20 AM | Reply

#22 | POSTED BY BRUCEBANNER

#1 is incorrect, you nor I have any idea why people dress the way you do until you ask them.

The whole HighTech culture was predicated upon not having professional behaviors and/or dress codes. It was California Hip and Cool....

Yet, now you are saying we need to dress and behave professionally...

What are you trying to do BruceBanner Make America Great Again?

#28 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-12-29 11:05 AM | Reply

"The whole HighTech culture was predicated upon not having professional behaviors and/or dress codes. It was California Hip and Cool...."

You don't know what your talking about. You actually support my argument.

Tech wears a uniform of the hoodie and sneaker. They all do it.

#29 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 11:07 AM | Reply

#20 to be honest, you're the one being flippant here.

Not at all.

Yes, one can tell the difference between potentially uncomfortable laughter and genuine laughter. One doesn't typically laugh until they cry when they're uncomfortable.

Also, you ignored the second part of my statement in which they also made jokes that were crude in nature.

They may have laughed because they were worried that they would make you upset by not laughing.

I'm not the type of personality who would get upset if someone didn't laugh. Would you?

#30 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 12:06 PM | Reply

Those are just some broadly applicable rules on commenting on appearances.

Thanks for the diversity and inclusion seminar *eye roll*.

But again, you apply a one sized fits all brush to the situation.

I've had close enough relationships with female coworkers where they've commented that a new shirt looks on me and I've commented that their new haircut looks good. Honestly, they've always expressed appreciation that I noticed.

Again, it's a case by case basis. I certainly don't say those sorts of things to everyone but it's quite clear when it's OK to.

#31 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 12:09 PM | Reply

I am applying a one-size fits-all. What else does you think was possible?

#30 you should question whether your ability to judge other's true feelings is accurate.

#30 lots of people laugh when they're uncomfortable. I do.

#30 I can't comment on your personal relationship with someone. I'm commenting on a hypothetical workplace. I'm thinking about it in terms of how it would appear to others if it were on the front page of the NYT.

My article from Forbes goes over it. It's not controversial.

#32 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 12:52 PM | Reply

#30 you should question whether your ability to judge other's true feelings is accurate.

Yes, of course. You're right without knowing a single bit of detailed information while I'm wrong while being there in person.

You'll fit right in on the fact free "Conservative" right with that attitude. It's considered a badge of honor to loudly talk out one's ass.

I'm commenting on a hypothetical workplace. I'm thinking about it in terms of how it would appear to others if it were on the front page of the NYT.

You're over thinking it.

#33 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 01:19 PM | Reply

Dude. I can't comment on your personal relationships. Please stop asking me to.

#34 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 01:24 PM | Reply

everyone but it's quite clear when it's OK to.

#31 | POSTED BY JPW

But again, you apply a one size fits all brush to the situation.

Bruce is saying what any HR department would say... cold hard facts man....nothing more...

I've had close enough relationships with female coworkers where they've commented that a new shirt looks on me and I've commented that their new haircut looks good. Honestly, they've always expressed appreciation that I noticed.

It's not harassment if it's welcomed, unfortunately, it is the second they change their mind, so only takes one time of them not liking the comment then... bam harassment.

Again, it's a case by case basis. I certainly don't say those sorts of things to everyone but it's quite clear when it's OK to.

LOL I'll throw a BS Flag at that.... A HR department will treat you just like everyone else (They have to) and not case by case... If you are overheard still harassment.... when it's OK changes so good luck...

#35 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2017-12-29 03:06 PM | Reply

That's my point. Which is why your critiques of my behavior above based on a broad brush approach were incorrect.

BTW I'll note I've never said anything like that in the Forbes link. That's just crass and not remotely funny.

#36 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 03:43 PM | Reply

#35 in which case things have gone too far. If one can eavesdrop on a conversation and claim harassment there's something messed up.

#37 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 03:45 PM | Reply

#37 Agreed.... But we didn't just get there... been that way for most my working life...

First mandatory class I had to take on it was when I was 18 and became a shift manager at a restaurant....

#38 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2017-12-29 03:59 PM | Reply

"If one can eavesdrop on a conversation and claim harassment there's something messed up.

#37 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2017-12-29 03:45 PM | REPLY | FLAG:"

This is indeed harassment. Not claimed, actually harassment.

#39 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:03 PM | Reply

Try to think of examples that would get you upset. Then you may be able to see. You're obviously having difficulty understanding that others may see your actions as problematic because you imagine that you have some super human ability to measure other's emotions. So far, I haven't seen evidence of that.

#40 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:05 PM | Reply

#38 | POSTED BY PINKYANTHEBRAIN

I agree with JPW's first proposition in #35, his second proposition is new and has not always been the case.

I have had the training since it became mandatory in California.

It's not harassment if it's welcomed

It depends upon the respective stations, if its a manager and employee, it didn't matter, its a no-no and it will be discouraged because upon dissolution of the relationship/welcoming, sexual harassment accusations are close behind.

Which is why the whole ClintonLewinsky thing is so preposterous.

As a general rule these days I would stay away from any form of commenting, flirting, even being alone with a woman at work these days. Read my link above as to why....

In the past it wasn't uncommon to meet your future wife at work, today it could be a "sentence" in future poverty.

#41 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-12-29 04:11 PM | Reply

Also found this deep in the article .. "...women were only somewhat less likely than men to admit to harassing behavior."

What?

#42 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2017-12-29 04:11 PM | Reply

This is indeed harassment. Not claimed, actually harassment.

#39 | Posted by BruceBanner

Which is absurd.

#43 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 04:20 PM | Reply

#42 - That's interesting Andrea. I hadn't noticed that line.

#44 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:20 PM | Reply

You're obviously having difficulty understanding that others may see your actions as problematic because you imagine that you have some super human ability to measure other's emotions.

What are you, some sort of sociopath who can't tell when you're friends do or don't find something offensive or distasteful?

Maybe that's the disconnect. Those I've been referring to are friends whom I spend time outside of work with as well.

Quite obviously I would not treat people whom I only interact with professionally the same way.

So far, I haven't seen evidence of that.

Because you only listen to the voices in your head. Remember that one?

#45 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 04:22 PM | Reply

#43 not at all. Consider an example that had you and Donner very upset the other day. Say Black co-workers are talking about how the Charlottesville thing is making them wonder if their kids can go to their White friend's house considering the rise in acceptance of hate. But this discussion is occurring within earshot of you. They may not even know you can hear, but you can.

It would obviously make you unhappy. You may feel excluded.

#46 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:22 PM | Reply

It would obviously make you unhappy. You may feel excluded.

#46 | Posted by BruceBanner

Nope.

Because I'm not a -----.

#47 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 04:24 PM | Reply

Come on, don't you know you're suppose to become a robot once you enter the doors of work? You should engage in no behavior that would indiciate familiarity or relationship with anyone, at any time. You're there to work, not to create friendships and relationships. If you can't be a robot at work under HR's rigid rules, then we will build robots to replace you.

#48 | Posted by gavaster at 2017-12-29 04:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

"Maybe that's the disconnect. Those I've been referring to are friends whom I spend time outside of work with as well."

Yes. Your personal friendships aren't the topic here. I tried to tell you that earlier upthread. What anyone does with their friends is doesn't matter - unless it's done at work or within a work event.

#49 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:24 PM | Reply

Nope.
Because I'm not a -----.

#47 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2017-12-29 04:24 PM | FLAG:

Not everyone is the same as you.

You need to go to a diversity training thing if you can. Contact your title IX person. They would be happy to tell you when the next one is.

You're obviously being antagonistic to the topic as a whole. Being inconsiderate doesn't make you more of a man.

#50 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:27 PM | Reply

#47 I recall you and Donner agreeing that the story was very very offensive when it was posted. Now you're brushing it off by claiming your testosterone levels are back up.

#51 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2017-12-29 04:28 PM | Reply

You need to go to a diversity training thing if you can.

I have to go through newly required training in the new year.

I'm guess it's going to be a giant waste of my time as it will simply rehash what I've seen here.

You're obviously being antagonistic to the topic as a whole. Being inconsiderate doesn't make you more of a man.

That's because I find this whole coddling nonsense ridiculous. People are thin skinned, self-centered asshats who think every single little "special" thing about them should be respected and taken seriously by everyone around them.

F--- that.

Brazen comments like those in the Forbes link are one thing (ie comments to women about being on their knees) and I wouldn't be caught dead making such comments.

But overhead personal conversations as a trigger event worthy of HR intervention? Unless they're talking about the next Klan rally or the person who's overhearing it specifically then grow the f--- up.

I recall you and Donner agreeing that the story was very very offensive when it was posted.

I'm not really offended by much of anything.

My view was that it was perpetrating the very thing he was worried about and was, therefore, counter productive. Nothing more, nothing less.

#52 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 04:38 PM | Reply

Being inconsiderate doesn't make you more of a man.

Inconsiderate would require me to purposefully do something offensive to someone.

And I have no worries as to my masculinity or whether I need more of it by being an ass.

Now you're brushing it off by claiming your testosterone levels are back up.

LOL how very sexist of you.

Try to stick to the conversation at hand without inserting nonsense.

#53 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-29 04:39 PM | Reply

I have to go through newly required training in the new year.
I'm guess it's going to be a giant waste of my time as it will simply rehash what I've seen here.

#52 | POSTED BY JPW

Pretty much have fun with that, better take some ear buds and have your phone ready to watch a movie...

#54 | Posted by PinkyanTheBrain at 2017-12-29 04:47 PM | Reply

While workplaces are places for equal opportunity for both sexes (sorry, all sexes, as it is {current year}), the unspoken threat of fraternization risks will further insulate the Ol' Boys club phenomenon.

My rule on this type of stuff is "don't be weird/ don't be creepy/ don't hook up with folks you'll see the workweek after the weekend."

#55 | Posted by GOnoles92 at 2017-12-30 12:23 PM | Reply

"I have to go through newly required training in the new year."

It's as if they pretend that those who harrass don't already know they are going something wrong. It's ridiculous. Perhaps the training needs to be more focused on the victims of harrassment, to teach them how they can ruin the lives of harrassers. At least, that would make a difference because attempting to educate harrassers is a complete waste of time and effort and won't change anything. Any person of normal intelligence already knows that sexual harrassment is wrong but it doesn't stop them.

#56 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-30 12:34 PM | Reply

That's what I was thinking danni. It's jusg to look good on paper and really does nothing to help solve the issues.

#57 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-30 12:56 PM | Reply

I also completely doubt that 1/3 of all working men actually admit to harassing women. I've witnessed it occasionally when it was directed towards some of the more attractive women in offices but, for the most part, most men I've worked with have been pretty decent guys. And I have worked around lots of men all my life. And, I would also have to add, some of the women I have worked around actively flirted with superiors, why is that not part of the discussion? And, yes, I did resent those women who flirted and then ended up in better positions with better pay. I still do. The whole discussion about workplace behavior needs to get away from the focus on men only, there are two sides to every story.

#58 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-30 01:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I was very good friends with an extremely fecund and buxom older blonde who worked as the bookkeeper at a company I was the lab manager at. This happened a couple times when I was in the front offices and I'd have to bend over to get something...like copier paper off the floor: She'd come up from behind me and grind her pubic bone into my behind, hard, in front of some of the other office ladies. You'd think this was sexy, but strangely, it wasn't. Especially being a redhead, I'd turn beet red in the face from embarrassment. I would laugh it off, but always wondered what the hell possessed her to do that.

#59 | Posted by madscientist at 2017-12-30 01:56 PM | Reply

The closest thing I could figure was that she was playfully marking me as her property in front of the other women.

#60 | Posted by madscientist at 2017-12-30 02:05 PM | Reply

"I have to go through newly required training in the new year."

"It's as if they pretend that those who harrass don't already know they are going something wrong. It's ridiculous."

Come on guys quit being so naive.

It's to protect the company from lawsuits.

Because typically the company is going to have much deeper pockets than the individual who decided to do some harassing on the company's dime.

By requiring training, they can shield themselves from claims of a hostile environment.

#61 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-30 02:17 PM | Reply

Oh I'm sure that's all it is. Punts the liability entirely into the individuals court at the expense of an over paid administrative position.

#62 | Posted by jpw at 2017-12-30 03:08 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort