home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!uknet!warwick!sunserver1.aston.ac.uk!uhura!evansmp
- From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
- Newsgroups: alt.comp.acad-freedom.talk
- Subject: Re: Preventing Sexual Harassment?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov9.081209.10227@aston.ac.uk>
- Date: 9 Nov 92 08:12:09 GMT
- References: <9211052135.AA09761@hibiscus.cit.cornell.edu>
- Sender: usenet@aston.ac.uk (Usenet administrator)
- Organization: Aston University
- Lines: 55
- Nntp-Posting-Host: uhura
-
- escheire@sunlab.cit.cornell.edu (Eric Scheirer) writes:
- :
- : Mark Evans (evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk) writes...
- :
- : > The problem appears to be that the laws are being implemented (if not written)
- : > in such a way that getting people to sit down and talk to one another is made
- : > more difficult (rather than easier).
- : .
- : .
- : .
- : > One thing, you could sue without having to ask her to do anything,
- : > without even attempting to sort this out using any form of negotiation.
- : > (also you can also sue anyone who attempts to tell you that talking with
- : > either the individual concerned, their supervisor, an indenpendent
- : > negotiator, might be a sensible course of action)
- :
- : Your postings seem to keep suggesting that all that is needed to take
- : care of sexual (and implicitly, other harassment) is for the involved
- : parties to sit down and have a good little chat.
- :
- : After all, we're all reasonable people here, aren't we?
-
- The legal solution also works fine when the people involved are being reasonable.
- :
- : I don't think anyone here is denying that this is the best solution
- : WHEN IT WORKS. The question is, what to do when it doesn't. Reasonable
- : people can still disagree -- I can quite reasonably believe that
- : my putting a racy GIF on my background window is protected speech; I
- : also think it's reasonable that my (female) supervisor would find it
- : bothersome.
- :
- : If she asked me, being who I am, I would most likely agree to take it down.
- : But the issue at stake here is, what if I felt sufficiently strongly about
- : my right to view such images that I refused? If no compromise can be reached,
- : and if neither party will back down, one side must give in. Sometime, the
- : question of "who should back down" must ultimately be settled in the courts.
- :
- However the way you have things set up, the powerfull presure groups make it
- most likely that it will be the person being complaind about who will most
- probably have to not only back down. But also be legally herassed and bullied
- into doing so.
-
- : I don't dispute in the least that U.S. society has become far too litigious,
- : what with marriage contracts and multi-million "negligence" lawsuits, which
- : I think is your implicit point. But I think your "let's be reasonable"
- : argument gives short shrift to what I see as a very valid argument regarding
- : constitutional conflict.
-
- Well what to you surgest then.
-
- --
- -------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Mark Evans |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
- +(44) 21 565 1979 (Home) |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
- +(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office) |
-