Sexual Harassment Test - Are you Part of the Problem?

[Rum]

I have only one episode of what my be called harassment or perhaps bullying to confess. I'm pretty sure it is the only time I have put any sort of pressure on a woman to have sex or even to be 'suggestive' - unless I knew it was OK in the relationship.

It happened on a first date and at the end of it we were making out and the woman concerned didn't want to have sex. I got a bit snotty and said I had better go then - in a bit of a huff. The woman in question asked me to stay and I did and we did have sex. I felt then and still feel I bullied her a bit by threatening to go if she didn't go along with it..

We got married a year later and were married for 14 mostly good years.

I still feel guilty to this day though. On the other hand we might not have got together. Life is complicated.

[Scot Dutchy]

Never bullied anyone male or female to have sex.

[Rum]

Never bullied anyone male or female to have sex.

AND you are Dutch. What a man you are! So much better than this lowly Englishman.

[Scot Dutchy]

Never bullied anyone male or female to have sex.

AND you are Dutch. What a man you are! So much better than this lowly Englishman.

Who is saying better? I am only a Dutch national for the last 50 years.

[Forty Two]

This whole "42 defends us all from an oncoming feminist socialist apocalypse by starting another thread ranting about whatever he doesn't understand on the internet today" routine - is really tedious.

LOL - the thread is about a particular sexual harassment test that has been circulating recently. The discussion is about that test. I have not declared it to be an oncoming feminist apocalypse. If you're not interested, go to or start a thread you're interested in. Jesus christ, it's only tedious because you bothered to open the thread and read. Don't read it. Can't you control yourself?

[NineBerry]

I wonder who has the time to read all those articles and watch all these lengthy YouTube videos.

[Forty Two]

Psycho

Is there a way to take the test other than to sit through the video because I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds...

Seriously, I think sexual harassment is a real and serious issue. I am glad that abusive people are getting exposed, but I am a little worried that the onslaught of reports of "sexual abuse" that contain things like Dustin Hoffman patting a woman on the ass 30 years ago are going to end up detracting from the real issue rather than highlighting it.

And I understand the other side of the argument that would say that the fact that we consider things like ass grabbing not big enough to mention in the light of the bigger issues an issue in itself. I don't know

I haven't found a way to take the test other than sit through the video. I checked and I guess there isn't.

What concerned me about the video is the overall lack ability to think clearly and logically about these things. "Have you ever looked at a woman's breasts when talking to her?" If so, then you're part of the problem. Things like that have the effect of making everyone a criminal. I know cis-hetero women who have looked at women's breasts when talking to them. Anytime the rule becomes as arbitrary as this, it becomes irrelevant. We're all criminals, so who gives a shit.

i'm not trying to make some sort of statement that "men are the victims," incidentally. Referring to other people's complaints about my postings. I don't think men are greater victims than women, as I don't subscribe to the group identity politic notion that sexual other groups are determinative of whether a person is a victim. In some ways, women get discriminated against, and in some ways men get discriminated against. There is no patriarchy. There is no system. The universe, is indifferent.

[PsychoSerenity]

This isn't "a particular sexual harassment test that has been circulating recently", as you've now acknowledged - it's just a single youtube video, and the "test" is just to highlight some discussion points in it. Where did you even find it? You seem to go out of your way looking for things to complain about.

The video is not "making everyone a criminal", it's not criminalising anyone. The whole point of the concept of micro-aggressions is not to persecute people for breaking an exhaustive list of rules, - it's to acknowledge that there are many slight and subtle ways we might do things that have negative effects on others and to give a few examples so we can think about how to improve our interactions. Some of the points may be debatable depending on definitions or subtleties - that's fine. But there's no reason to denounce the whole thing as idiotic and problematic, just because you're too defensive to grasp the subtleties. Many of the points raised are frankly pretty obvious sexual harassment.

For example, you argue that everyone has stolen a kiss. Well perhaps depending on your definition many people have, but as they explain they're using the term to mean kissing someone without consent. That doesn't have to be verbal consent. But I would hope as you describe leaning in to kiss someone goodnight that if the other person doesn't also lean in, if they freeze uncomfortably or pull back, you don't continue to kiss them against their will. If you do, - of course that's inappropriate.

I'm pretty sure it is possible to for someone to score zero on their test, but as they explain in the video, the presenters themselves admit to failing in some of these ways. Nobody's perfect and even with the best of intentions we will all make mistakes. The purpose is to highlight behaviours that any of us might inadvertently do, and that individually are not the end of the world, but that when they happen repeatedly and unchallenged add to a culture of harassment and oppression. We all are part of the same culture and if we want to make it better, and avoid making others feel uncomfortable or harassed, it's a good idea to try to listen and learn what people do or don't like, and what we can do to recognise and stand up to these behaviours when we see them in ourselves and others.

[pErvinalia]

It's all part of the insidious ideology of cultural Marxism to take away our freedums!

[Forty Two]

This isn't "a particular sexual harassment test that has been circulating recently", as you've now acknowledged - it's just a single youtube video, and the "test" is just to highlight some discussion points in it. Where did you even find it? You seem to go out of your way looking for things to complain about.

What does that have to do with anything? I found it by listening to a youtube video about it while driving to work. I found it funny, and interesting.

The video is not "making everyone a criminal", it's not criminalising anyone.

Yes, I know that, Forrest. I wasn't literally referring to these two ladies being able to make something a crime. I think that should have been obvious, but if it wasn't, I was suggesting that anytime a "test" renders everyone "part of the problem" it's not a particularly effective test. It renders responsibility for sexual harassment arbitraru/

The whole point of the concept of micro-aggressions is not to persecute people for breaking an exhaustive list of rules, - it's to acknowledge that there are many slight and subtle ways we might do things that have negative effects on others and to give a few examples so we can think about how to improve our interactions. Some of the points may be debatable depending on definitions or subtleties - that's fine. But there's no reason to denounce the whole thing as idiotic and problematic, just because you're too defensive to grasp the subtleties. Many of the points raised are frankly pretty obvious sexual harassment.

Microaggressions are not sexual harassment.

For example, you argue that everyone has stolen a kiss. Well perhaps depending on your definition many people have, but as they explain they're using the term to mean kissing someone without consent. That doesn't have to be verbal consent.

If you have consent, then it's not a stolen kiss. To steal means to take without consent. A stolen kiss is, like, when you're walking with a date and you lean over and kiss her, because you want to and you think the context is romantic and warrants a kiss. If you're wrong, and she didn't want it, then it's stolen. However, being wrong in a customary situation where someone may try to kiss someone else is not "part of the problem." I've had women do that me, even when it was totally unexpected - it's been a while - but it happened. I didn't give consent. They stole a kiss.

But I would hope as you describe leaning in to kiss someone goodnight that if the other person doesn't also lean in, if they freeze uncomfortably or pull back, you don't continue to kiss them against their will. If you do, - of course that's inappropriate.

Sure, but that's stealing a kiss when you know that they don't want you to try to kiss them.

Some women, not all, but some, have said that they like when a guy "tries" to make a pass, even if they don't actually want to follow through, or if they won't let him follow through. It's part of courtship. So, even where a woman pulls away, context is subtle. The issue i have is with stretching the limits of "harassment" to the point where everyone is at risk of being declared a harasser if they look at a woman's tits.

I saw couple scenes last night of the movie "Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery." There was a scene where he's with Elizabeth Hurley and he comes right out and says they should go to bed together and "shag" and then he starts moving in different poses and asking her if he makes her horny and randy. Is that a depiction of sexual harassment? Part of a "problem" in society? I mean, he looked at her body. He made comments to her about sex without her asking for them. According to the test in the video, that's massive sexual harassment, getting several points in one go.

[PsychoSerenity]

Right that explains it. The original video linked in the article only has ten-thousand views which is a circulation so small as to be almost negative. I was astonished that you so often seem to find the time to watch/read all these often obscure videos and articles that you find "interesting" to make threads about them, while seemingly not taking in a word any of them say. But it turns out instead you were listening to some arsehole who goes out of his way to look for things for people like you to get offended about, in this case sarcastically trying to ridicule the original video by cutting out all the discussion and explanation. Har Har, doesn't it seem funny when you do that?

As a result you've completely failed to realise that in this case having a test that most people fail is the whole fucking point. It's not an actual test to see if you're a "dangerous sexual predator" as your video claims, - they're simply saying there's always room for people to improve.

As for that Austin Powers scene - I don't quite get what you're on about. If I remember correctly the joke there was that Austin had time-travelled from the 60s to the present day and as a result was completely out of touch with what was now considered appropriate behaviour in a professional environment. Other people seem to have made the journey through time the long way around but have kept their eyes shut all the way.

[Forty Two]

Right that explains it. The original video linked in the article only has ten-thousand views which is a circulation so small as to be almost negative. I was astonished that you so often seem to find the time to watch/read all these often obscure videos and articles that you find "interesting" to make threads about them, while seemingly not taking in a word any of them say.

Well, I think this is just you going down the insult road. I do take in what they say. It seems to me that you and some others don't, or you read into them what you want to read in. If you find the issue to be insignificant, then don't post about it. Just focus on what you're interested in. There are threads on this website about the smell of farts, or what beer people will have today. Does everything have to meet your preferred level of importance before it's posted about?

But it turns out instead you were listening to some arsehole who goes out of his way to look for things for people like you to get offended about,

I haven't expressed offense. i've discussed the issue raised in the video. That's why these folks published the video on youtube, for people to watch it, comment on it, and to discuss it. Is there a reason why that's inappropriate?

in this case sarcastically trying to ridicule the original video by cutting out all the discussion and explanation. Har Har, doesn't it seem funny when you do that?

Of course, nobody cut out all the discussion and explanation, and I posted the full video. You asked where I had heard of it. i told you. Now that's a problem, too?

As a result you've completely failed to realise that in this case having a test that most people fail is the whole fucking point. It's not an actual test to see if you're a "dangerous sexual predator" as your video claims, - they're simply saying there's always room for people to improve.

Actually, they're saying if you score anything above zero, you're "part of the problem" of sexual harassment.

As for that Austin Powers scene - I don't quite get what you're on about. If I remember correctly the joke there was that Austin had time-travelled from the 60s to the present day and as a result was completely out of touch with what was now considered appropriate behaviour in a professional environment. Other people seem to have made the journey through time the long way around but have kept their eyes shut all the way.

There's a difference between considering something culturally appropriate conduct, and considering it a sexual harassment problem. Culturally inappropriate behavior is dealt with by a free people in their interactions. Sexual harassment is prohibited by law.

[Brian Peacock]

it used to be culturally appropriate to slap someone on the ass and make lewd comments about their physical attributes. I know, because it happened to me. Culture is dynamic, it shifts.

In the UK unlawful sexual harassment is laid out in two main bodies of statue law: the Sexual Offences Act, 2003, and the Equality Act, 2010. Sexual harassment is defined as 'unwanted behaviour of a sexual nature' which may violate or compromise the dignity of an individual or group, intimidate, degrade or humiliate, or creates a hostile or offensive environment. In this regard sexual harassment does not fall totally within the purview of the individual who is, or feels that they are or may have been, compromised or harassed - others can object to such behaviour even if the subject of such attention does not. The 2010 Act also addresses the question of intent and renders sexual harassment a form of unlawful discrimination whereby a court may determine if the behaviour is meant to, or can be reasonably expected to have the effect of, violating dignity or creating an 'intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.'

Additionally, statues such as the Criminal Justice and Police Act, 2001 Sec 44, the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act, 2004 Sec 12, and the Protection of Freedoms Act, 2012 sub-Sec 111 and 112, also provide means and remedies with regards to harassment - some of which may involve harassment of a sexual nature.