Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

The Sexual Harassment Industry

Who really benefits from expanding what qualifies as harassment?

by
Helen Smith

Bio

June 6, 2013 - 9:00 am

shutterstock_95318893

Over at Minding the Campus, Peter Wood writes an important article called “Sexual Harassment–The Feds Go Way Too Far”:

The DOJ/OCR Montana letter is a grab for power. To that extent, it is self-explaining. Opposing sexual harassment is a profession and, to some extent, an industry. The self-interest of the people who make their living opposing sexual harassment lies on the side of lower standards of evidence, broader definitions, and minimization of obstacles to new regulations. Regulatory self-aggrandizement is not a mystery, though it is usually mysterious to the regulators themselves who have a level of difficulty in apprehending their own motives akin to that of anorexics attempting to form an accurate picture of their bodies.

But empire building is only part of the story. The Montana letter is a step in the long progression of feminism towards a surveillance society. Fifteen years ago Daphne Patai in her book Heterophobia: Sexual Harassment and the Future of Feminism diagnosed feminism’s effort to write “a new chapter in the dystopian tradition of surveillance and unfreedom.” Patai saw the coming emphasis on “transparency, whereby one’s every gesture, every thought, is exposed to the judgment of one’s fellow citizens.” OCR is of course far from this level of intrusiveness, but not in spirit.

*****

Cross-posted from Dr. Helen

Image courtesy shutterstock / Camilo Torres

Helen Smith is a psychologist specializing in forensic issues in Knoxville, Tennessee, and blogs at Dr. Helen.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
If she is uninterested in him, it is. If she thinks he's cute, it isn't. Unless later on (days, weeks), she discovers he's a jerk, then it is. Unless her friends still thinks he's a hunk and she's lucky he's interested, then it isn't.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (9)
All Comments   (9)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Wait - a guy named "Peter Wood" is writing about sexual harassment?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Lawyers. You don't even have to read the article to know that.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In other words, sexual harassment is completely subjective and based only on the whims and caprice of the accuser. There is no objective component at all. Craziness. I'm glad I don't have a son heading off to university.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
In twenty-odd years of employee relations I found the difference between an office romance and sexual harassment was usually whether or not she got the perk or promotion. I've seen true quid pro quo harassment, but in that span I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times. Disparate treatment/disparate impact is usually a sham but whether or not it is successful depends on who has the best lawyers. Medium size businesses are meat for the plaintiffs' bar; they have enough money to be worth a lawsuit but don't have the HR/LR and legal resources of a large business or government. A big problem with the larger entities is their settleing to avoid bad publicity or facing a jury. I know that if I could settle in the six figure range, I usually would to avoid facing 12 morons with drivers' licenses.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
I'm not an expert, but I suspect the behavior shown in that picture is over the line.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Actually, if unwelcome, that is sexual assault and he goes to jail. We had a rule about relations between State employees and inmates in our correctional facilities that prohibited what we euphemistically called "undue familiarity." Since a goodly percentage of the women in our prisons were veterans of the sex and drug trades, they were very good at getting over on weak-minded men. The only trouble is; in prison nothing is free and especially nothing as valuable as sex is free, so they got ratted out.

My favorite was a cook who was accused of fondling the breasts of a female inmate. She was a federal remand, a temporary guest of ours on her way back to CA for some serious time. She didn't report it but rather told a fellow female inmate who reported it. She'd listed her occupation on the booking form as "Escort." We yanked the cook in, he mumbled a lot, and we fired him. I called the female's probation officer in CA to ask him if I could talk to her and potentially use her as a witness either in person at Alaska's expense or by phone. He said he'd ask her if she'd cooperate. He called back in a couple of days and said she'd cooperate but wanted to know if I wanted to talke to her about the "thing with the cook" or the murder.

Anyway, she was a good witness and her testimony never varied. She may have been lying but she was good at it. The cook was accompanied by his wife at the hearing. I'll confess to having made the best of that by asking him some VERY detailed questions. He came off as inconsistent and nervous as the proverbial prostitute in church. He lost and stayed fired but it didn't result in any criminal charges though it could have. I made the complaint but it was really just a money thing about bringing her up for a criminal trial for no particularly good reason; it ain't like nobody had ever touched them before.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Don't be silly. Don't you understand? The man doing it is a Democrat who supports a women's right to choose!!!!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
If she is uninterested in him, it is. If she thinks he's cute, it isn't. Unless later on (days, weeks), she discovers he's a jerk, then it is. Unless her friends still thinks he's a hunk and she's lucky he's interested, then it isn't.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
And that's exactly why it is horribly wrong to inflict any sort of totally subjective accusation on anyone. If it's only wrong depending on the whim of the victim and there are no objective criteria, then the accused is at maximum risk all the time and the victim has the power to sweep away anyone at all for any whim at all.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
View All