Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-09-2017, 04:20 PM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,520
A big thread about consent

I see a lot of folks that express confusion about consent or something related to consent. I hear stuff like "Does that mean I can't try to kiss my date?" or "am I gonna be fired for patting my co-worker on the shoulder?".

IMO, consent isn't hard. None of the scenarios that I've heard expressed as confusing or challenging seem so to me. IMO, it depends on a lot of things, but it's pretty much all common sense.

If you're on a date, sitting on a park bench, you can put your arm around your date. If they don't want it there, they'll probably make it clear, and you can take it away. If they're okay with it, you can lean in for a kiss. They'll probably kiss you if they want, and if not, they'll turn the other way. Etc.

That's pretty straight forward, right? So are other scenarios. At work, don't put your arm around a co-worker. Don't try to kiss them. Don't touch any part of their body, in general, unless required for work. Maybe a pat on the shoulder or back is okay under a few circumstances with long-time co-workers/friends.

There are a million other scenarios, of course. But I haven't come across any that are that hard, IMO. So who's confused about consent? Who's scared that they'll get in trouble? Let's talk about it.
  #2  
Old 12-09-2017, 04:26 PM
PastTense PastTense is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 6,119
From the other threads I got the impression that some think you need to get verbal consent before you can put your arm around your date.
  #3  
Old 12-09-2017, 04:27 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,594
Oh boy, this will end well.

Gray areas about consent.
  • What if one party is drunk?
  • What if both parties are drunk?
  • What if one party consents because the other party lied? Where does it end? Is lying about your job and someone sleeping with you based on that rape? What if a woman wears spanx and 'lies' about her figure? Where does lying about your sexual desirability reach the point where you aren't consenting based on what is really happening? Is lying by pretending you are a millionaire rape? What about lying by wearing makeup? Where is the line regarding presenting a false impression of your own sexual desirablity
  • What if both parties enjoy BDSM games and one party misreads the body language of the other partner?
  • What if both parties consent during the act, but down the road one of the parties decided they didn't consent?
  • What if one party has power over the other? Older age, holds debt the other person owes, understands the other parties psychological weaknesses, etc.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #4  
Old 12-09-2017, 04:58 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
If you're on a date, sitting on a park bench, you can put your arm around your date. If they don't want it there, they'll probably make it clear, and you can take it away. If they're okay with it, you can lean in for a kiss. They'll probably kiss you if they want, and if not, they'll turn the other way. Etc.
Right. The rules change with the situation. Two people on a date should expect some touching, which they can also say no to, but you don't need permission to start touching. Doctors can't put there hands anywhere on a patient at any time but for certain kinds of exams and treatments there is an expectation they will touch you. And if you don't like it you can go find another doctor who won't touch you.

Quote:
That's pretty straight forward, right? So are other scenarios. At work, don't put your arm around a co-worker. Don't try to kiss them. Don't touch any part of their body, in general, unless required for work. Maybe a pat on the shoulder or back is okay under a few circumstances with long-time co-workers/friends.
This seems simple to me. I think the rule can be clearer by saying some physically harmless and non threatening touching is not a violation per se but still must stop if there is an objection. So if someone touches a co-workers shoulder you don't need to evaluate the depth of the relationship, if the person touched says stop then it can't happen again.

And why do there have to be some minor exceptions like that? Why can't you just say no touching allowed? Because then life becomes a constant trip in the family car listening to the kids in the back whining - "He touched me!" - "Nuh uh, she touched me first" - "He's looking at me!".

Last edited by TriPolar; 12-09-2017 at 04:59 PM.
  #5  
Old 12-09-2017, 05:18 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Oh boy, this will end well.

Gray areas about consent.
  • What if one party is drunk?
  • What if both parties are drunk?
  • What if one party consents because the other party lied? Where does it end? Is lying about your job and someone sleeping with you based on that rape? What if a woman wears spanx and 'lies' about her figure? Where does lying about your sexual desirability reach the point where you aren't consenting based on what is really happening? Is lying by pretending you are a millionaire rape? What about lying by wearing makeup? Where is the line regarding presenting a false impression of your own sexual desirablity
  • What if both parties enjoy BDSM games and one party misreads the body language of the other partner?
  • What if both parties consent during the act, but down the road one of the parties decided they didn't consent?
  • What if one party has power over the other? Older age, holds debt the other person owes, understands the other parties psychological weaknesses, etc.
Ok, let's say drunk means voluntarily intoxicated past the ability to consent.
  • If one party is drunk, they can't consent.
  • If both parties are drunk they are equivalent to wild animals and not responsible for their actions. There is no question of consent.
  • Lies are irrelevant. If you consent you consent. It's not a quid pro quo, you unconditionally consent to specific acts and have no expectation for anything in return.
  • Re: BDSM - If you play dangerous games you take risks. Don't consent if you don't want to take the risk.
  • You can consent shortly prior to becoming too intoxicated to consent. You can still object while intoxicated, but you can't decide after the fact that you would have changed their mind if you didn't become voluntarily intoxicated.
  • Your examples of power are irrelevant outside professional relationships. If you are in debt just say no. You already owe the money, saying no doesn't increase your debt, there's no power there. If you want to pay off your debt with sex then go ahead and try but don't expect me to pay taxes to enforce sex contracts. Psychological weaknesses are your own problem. If a professional counselor or doctor takes advantage of what they know of your psychological state it should be a crime without regard to the issue of consent.

These things really aren't that difficult if you assume people should take responsibility for their own actions and their own consent. You can take back consent any time up the present, but not in the future.

Last edited by TriPolar; 12-09-2017 at 05:20 PM.
  #6  
Old 12-09-2017, 05:19 PM
treis treis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post

IMO, consent isn't hard. None of the scenarios that I've heard expressed as confusing or challenging seem so to me. IMO, it depends on a lot of things, but it's pretty much all common sense.

If you're on a date, sitting on a park bench, you can put your arm around your date. If they don't want it there, they'll probably make it clear, and you can take it away. If they're okay with it, you can lean in for a kiss. They'll probably kiss you if they want, and if not, they'll turn the other way. Etc.

That's pretty straight forward, right?
This example clearly runs afoul of most affirmative consent policies.
  #7  
Old 12-09-2017, 05:29 PM
Cartooniverse Cartooniverse is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Betwixt My Ears
Posts: 12,075
I can't comment on the O.P.'s remarks on dating. I'm 55. Cannot even imagine dating.

That said, the workplace? I've modified my behavior at work.

No eye contact.
Never smile at a female co-worker.
No physical contact of any kind, at any time, for any reason.
When walking down the weirdly narrow hallways behind the studio, if a woman is approaching, I stop.
Period.

I'm there to do my job. Not look at women. Long as I hew to that behavior, nobody can accuse me of anything.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
  #8  
Old 12-09-2017, 05:36 PM
RitterSport RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,216
This thread won't resolve anything. For most non-jerks, this isn't really an issue. It's clear when to move forward and clear when to stop and back off. If you're really unclear, you'd better err on the side of caution.

Situations where genuinely well-meaning people actually get in trouble with consent are so few and far between that they aren't worth discussing.

So, this thread will consist of people bringing up all kinds of edge cases that rarely or never happen in real life, and others explaining what to do, and then back and forth.

With many threads similar to this one, I find myself thinking, "can that poster be serious? Does he really not know what to do?" or "Welcome to Planet Earth! I'd like to explain how humans interact with each other, but it may take a while."

The "Don't be a jerk" rule extends past these boards into real life and is often an excellent guide as to how to deal with the opposite sex. The reason why edge cases make the news is because they are so rare -- for every bizarre accusation or bizarre defense, there are millions and millions of human interactions that proceed just fine.

Anyway, those are my two cents. No cites for my opinions above, sorry.
  #9  
Old 12-09-2017, 05:38 PM
RitterSport RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
I can't comment on the O.P.'s remarks on dating. I'm 55. Cannot even imagine dating.

That said, the workplace? I've modified my behavior at work.

No eye contact.
Never smile at a female co-worker.
No physical contact of any kind, at any time, for any reason.
When walking down the weirdly narrow hallways behind the studio, if a woman is approaching, I stop.
Period.

I'm there to do my job. Not look at women. Long as I hew to that behavior, nobody can accuse me of anything.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
How very odd. You don't even shake hands? The way you act towards women at work is much worse than if you just treated them like the men you work with.

Last edited by RitterSport; 12-09-2017 at 05:39 PM. Reason: ETA: "like THE men"
  #10  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:08 PM
Ulfreida Ulfreida is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: the western edge.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
How very odd. You don't even shake hands? The way you act towards women at work is much worse than if you just treated them like the men you work with.
Yeah, really. "I refuse to understand how to treat women as equals. Instead I will try to punish them a different way while sulking in self-pity."

All these men -- and it really is all men -- saying I AM SO CONFUSED AND AFRAID NOW.

Just friggin be polite, how hard can that be? Already polite? You are good to go. Don't know whether you're polite or not? Very simple: would you want a man doing to you what you are doing to her? If the answer is no, just stop doing it! Ta da! Fixed it for ya.

Yet the whining and cowering continues.

Dates are about trying out romantic possibilities. They are inherently full of encroachments, hints not taken, misunderstandings, and everyone trying too hard. Just be polite! Not sure if she's in the mood for it? Use your words, big guy.

Last edited by Ulfreida; 12-09-2017 at 06:10 PM.
  #11  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:15 PM
RitterSport RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
...
All these men -- and it really is all men -- saying I AM SO CONFUSED AND AFRAID NOW.
...
I think you meant to say, "All these men -- and it really is ONLY men...", because what you wrote is pretty ambiguous to me and you look like you're implying all men are confused and afraid. I hope that's not what you're saying -- don't make me get all hashtag on you!
  #12  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:22 PM
Cartooniverse Cartooniverse is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Betwixt My Ears
Posts: 12,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
How very odd. You don't even shake hands? The way you act towards women at work is much worse than if you just treated them like the men you work with.
Interesting. You can call it worse.

I call it professional and respectful.

It's not my job to hug or touch women at work.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
__________________
If you want to kiss the sky you'd better learn how to kneel.
  #13  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:35 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
This thread won't resolve anything. For most non-jerks, this isn't really an issue. It's clear when to move forward and clear when to stop and back off. If you're really unclear, you'd better err on the side of caution.

Situations where genuinely well-meaning people actually get in trouble with consent are so few and far between that they aren't worth discussing.

So, this thread will consist of people bringing up all kinds of edge cases that rarely or never happen in real life, and others explaining what to do, and then back and forth.

With many threads similar to this one, I find myself thinking, "can that poster be serious? Does he really not know what to do?" or "Welcome to Planet Earth! I'd like to explain how humans interact with each other, but it may take a while."

The "Don't be a jerk" rule extends past these boards into real life and is often an excellent guide as to how to deal with the opposite sex. The reason why edge cases make the news is because they are so rare -- for every bizarre accusation or bizarre defense, there are millions and millions of human interactions that proceed just fine.

Anyway, those are my two cents. No cites for my opinions above, sorry.
Thanks for posting so I don't have to.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #14  
Old 12-09-2017, 06:57 PM
D'Anconia D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
Interesting. You can call it worse.

I call it professional and respectful.

It's not my job to hug or touch women at work.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Do you hug or touch men at work? If so, what's the difference?
  #15  
Old 12-09-2017, 07:07 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Do you hug or touch men at work?
No.

Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
If so, what's the difference?
You can't be fucking serious! JFC.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #16  
Old 12-09-2017, 07:23 PM
D'Anconia D'Anconia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 3,333
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
You can't be fucking serious!
Actually, I am. One shouldn't be hugging anyone at work, male or female.
  #17  
Old 12-09-2017, 07:41 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by D'Anconia View Post
Actually, I am. One shouldn't be hugging anyone at work, male or female.
Then say that instead of asking why it's different for men vs. women given the preponderance of harassment of women by men.

FWIW, I agree. Don't be handsy is a good universal rule for the workplace.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #18  
Old 12-09-2017, 07:48 PM
RitterSport RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Thanks for posting so I don't have to.
I'm there for you! Now, give me a hug. NOW!
  #19  
Old 12-09-2017, 08:17 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
I'm there for you! Now, give me a hug. NOW!
Reported!

__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #20  
Old 12-09-2017, 08:38 PM
Ulfreida Ulfreida is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: the western edge.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by RitterSport View Post
I think you meant to say, "All these men -- and it really is ONLY men...", because what you wrote is pretty ambiguous to me and you look like you're implying all men are confused and afraid. I hope that's not what you're saying -- don't make me get all hashtag on you!
No. All the people who are confused about what consent means seem to be men. Sorry if that was ambiguous. Please, not the hashtag!
  #21  
Old 12-09-2017, 08:43 PM
Ulfreida Ulfreida is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: the western edge.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
Interesting. You can call it worse.

I call it professional and respectful.

It's not my job to hug or touch women at work.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
If I worked with a guy who refused to look at me, and if I passed him in the hallway he always stopped and looked down (because refusing to look at me), I would think something weird was wrong with him. I really doubt you treat men that way.

I treat possibly-dangerous animals that way. They often resent being looked at and certainly resent being touched unless they initiate it. Perhaps there's a link.
  #22  
Old 12-09-2017, 08:55 PM
Wesley Clark Wesley Clark is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 18,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
Ok, let's say drunk means voluntarily intoxicated past the ability to consent.
  • If one party is drunk, they can't consent.
  • If both parties are drunk they are equivalent to wild animals and not responsible for their actions. There is no question of consent.
  • Lies are irrelevant. If you consent you consent. It's not a quid pro quo, you unconditionally consent to specific acts and have no expectation for anything in return.
  • Re: BDSM - If you play dangerous games you take risks. Don't consent if you don't want to take the risk.
  • You can consent shortly prior to becoming too intoxicated to consent. You can still object while intoxicated, but you can't decide after the fact that you would have changed their mind if you didn't become voluntarily intoxicated.
  • Your examples of power are irrelevant outside professional relationships. If you are in debt just say no. You already owe the money, saying no doesn't increase your debt, there's no power there. If you want to pay off your debt with sex then go ahead and try but don't expect me to pay taxes to enforce sex contracts. Psychological weaknesses are your own problem. If a professional counselor or doctor takes advantage of what they know of your psychological state it should be a crime without regard to the issue of consent.

These things really aren't that difficult if you assume people should take responsibility for their own actions and their own consent. You can take back consent any time up the present, but not in the future.
The drunk part and consent is tricky. I tend to believe it depends on whether there is an existing sexual relationship. If two strangers meet in a bar, and one is drunk and the other isn't it is iffy, but still not sexual assault (it isn't sexual assault IMO unless one party is passed out from being drunk or intoxicated).

However if they are in an established relationship and they have had sex before, then issues like drunkenness are not issues. If one party is drunk or both are drunk, if it is an established relationship then its not an issue.
__________________
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to sparkle motion
  #23  
Old 12-09-2017, 09:08 PM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by treis View Post
This example clearly runs afoul of most affirmative consent policies.
Not that I'm aware of.
  #24  
Old 12-09-2017, 09:19 PM
RitterSport RitterSport is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Not that I'm aware of.
It runs afoul of that weird caricature of the consent rules where you're apparently supposed to hear yes before you move forward at all. It's a good guide, I guess, for people who have no ability to read other people.

As she lies there frozen in terror or disgust, "hey, she never said no so I went ahead!" It's for people like that you need Yes means Yes. For them, it makes sense to ask, may I kiss you? Can I put my hand there? How about there? Because, they apparently have no ability to tell when someone is squirming away or too drunk to consent.

The reality, of course, is that millions of people get together every day with consent without anyone actually saying Yes. Because, when you move in for the kiss and she moves in for the kiss, you're probably fine to move forward. When she goes to touch there and you move her hand away, it's probably a good time to step back.
  #25  
Old 12-09-2017, 09:58 PM
Mijin Mijin is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 7,945
I think part of the problem is we're influenced by the way people get together in fiction. Seriously.

It makes dramatic sense for a kiss to be a sudden thing. So many men can relate, at least in high school, to leaning in for a kiss and being rejected.

Most of us learn that it shouldn't happen like that; you gradually escalate physical contact from gentle tap on elbow, to kiss, getting feedback the whole time on whether she's willing.

Movies are starting to catch up too; some of the cliche romance tropes (which are actually creepy) are dying off.

Sent from my Mi-4c using Tapatalk
  #26  
Old 12-09-2017, 10:13 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
The drunk part and consent is tricky. I tend to believe it depends on whether there is an existing sexual relationship. If two strangers meet in a bar, and one is drunk and the other isn't it is iffy, but still not sexual assault (it isn't sexual assault IMO unless one party is passed out from being drunk or intoxicated).

However if they are in an established relationship and they have had sex before, then issues like drunkenness are not issues. If one party is drunk or both are drunk, if it is an established relationship then its not an issue.
It will remain tricky. Part of the problem is defining the line where it is a societal function to judge the actions of drunks. I don't have a problem with people acting like wild animals in private, I encourage it some forms, but if you're going to get drunk with others in private don't put a burden on me to figure out who consented to what.
  #27  
Old 12-09-2017, 10:26 PM
nelliebly nelliebly is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
I can't comment on the O.P.'s remarks on dating. I'm 55. Cannot even imagine dating.

That said, the workplace? I've modified my behavior at work.

No eye contact.
Never smile at a female co-worker.
No physical contact of any kind, at any time, for any reason.
When walking down the weirdly narrow hallways behind the studio, if a woman is approaching, I stop.
Period.

I'm there to do my job. Not look at women. Long as I hew to that behavior, nobody can accuse me of anything.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
The no-physical-contact decision makes sense, but I'm guessing your job doesn't require much personal interaction. I can't imagine anyone who could consistently and successfully interact in person with coworkers and supervisors without any eye contact whatsoever. Furthermore, if you're making eye contact with male coworkers and not female coworkers, you're not necessarily avoiding trouble. If anyone, male or female, treated me and others that way at work, I'd frankly be a little creeped out.

Do you ever speak to woman at work? If so, do you speak to them the same way you speak to men?
  #28  
Old 12-10-2017, 12:28 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 37,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Clark View Post
Oh boy, this will end well.

Gray areas about consent.
  • What if both parties enjoy BDSM games and one party misreads the body language of the other partner?
That's what safe words are for, un-graying the situation.
__________________
Life ain't peaches and cream, but sometimes it's laughing your ass off when you have no ass. - WhyNot
  #29  
Old 12-10-2017, 12:31 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 37,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
No. All the people who are confused about what consent means seem to be men. Sorry if that was ambiguous. Please, not the hashtag!
Your original version can be read as "every man is confused". RitterSport's correction was "all the people who are confused happen to be men". So, since RS's version apparently is what you meant, what is that "no" supposed to mean?
__________________
Life ain't peaches and cream, but sometimes it's laughing your ass off when you have no ass. - WhyNot
  #30  
Old 12-10-2017, 12:57 AM
Gatopescado Gatopescado is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: on your last raw nerve
Posts: 18,057
Geez, I miss the 80's.
  #31  
Old 12-10-2017, 01:32 AM
Whack-a-Mole Whack-a-Mole is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Chicago, IL USA
Posts: 18,909
Former US Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart, when faced with defining what makes something pornographic, quipped, "I know it when I see it."

I think this is a lot like that. People want a bright line definition but as you delve into it there just isn't one. The world just doesn't work this way and therin lies the impossible to resolve problem at hand.

Any way to regiment this and get that bright line ends up being really weird and impractical.

Last edited by Whack-a-Mole; 12-10-2017 at 01:33 AM.
  #32  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:26 AM
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 3,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
The no-physical-contact decision makes sense, but I'm guessing your job doesn't require much personal interaction. I can't imagine anyone who could consistently and successfully interact in person with coworkers and supervisors without any eye contact whatsoever. Furthermore, if you're making eye contact with male coworkers and not female coworkers, you're not necessarily avoiding trouble. If anyone, male or female, treated me and others that way at work, I'd frankly be a little creeped out.

Do you ever speak to woman at work? If so, do you speak to them the same way you speak to men?
Exactly, the best policy is to treat female co-workers like the humans they are.

If you are grabbing the asses, kissing or making sex jokes with co-workers who are the same gender, and making ignoring contact with women in the workplace you have a bigger issue.

Sexual harassment is sexual harassment no matter what the recipient's gender is. Men who have been sexually assaulted have the same feelings and reactions as other do, but they typically also face some additional challenges on taking action because of societal norms.

The best policy is to just avoid making of unwanted sexual advances or obscene remarks to any coworker.

Nelliebly is making the proper argument here, no special treatment of women is required from men, all that is required is being respectful and professional with everyone.
  #33  
Old 12-10-2017, 09:48 AM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
I can't comment on the O.P.'s remarks on dating. I'm 55. Cannot even imagine dating.

That said, the workplace? I've modified my behavior at work.

No eye contact.
Never smile at a female co-worker.
No physical contact of any kind, at any time, for any reason.
When walking down the weirdly narrow hallways behind the studio, if a woman is approaching, I stop.
Period.

I'm there to do my job. Not look at women. Long as I hew to that behavior, nobody can accuse me of anything.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
I'll assume this is user_name/post combo irony. The alternative is a description of behavior too dysfunctional to contemplate.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #34  
Old 12-10-2017, 09:51 AM
Ulfreida Ulfreida is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: the western edge.
Posts: 2,488
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nava View Post
Your original version can be read as "every man is confused". RitterSport's correction was "all the people who are confused happen to be men". So, since RS's version apparently is what you meant, what is that "no" supposed to mean?
Still not clear, huh? Let me try one more time.

The people who are confused about what consent is, are all men. Women do not seem to be confused.

Men
subset A: confused about consent.
subset B: not confused about consent

Women
all not confused about consent

Does that work?

Last edited by Ulfreida; 12-10-2017 at 09:51 AM.
  #35  
Old 12-10-2017, 01:39 PM
treis treis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 9,189
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Not that I'm aware of.
The first google hit for affirmative consent gives a page with this:

Quote:
Silence or lack of resistance, in and of itself, does not demonstrate consent.
http://system.suny.edu/sexual-violen...ative-consent/

Your plan to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii
Put your arm around your date, If they don't want it there, they'll probably make it clear
Clearly violates that.
  #36  
Old 12-10-2017, 02:15 PM
iiandyiiii iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 27,520
Quote:
Originally Posted by treis View Post
The first google hit for affirmative consent gives a page with this:



http://system.suny.edu/sexual-violen...ative-consent/

Your plan to:



Clearly violates that.
You might notice that your link discusses affirmative consent for sexual activity. Putting your arm around someone is not sexual activity.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 12-10-2017 at 02:17 PM.
  #37  
Old 12-10-2017, 02:23 PM
rat avatar rat avatar is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Seattle, Wa
Posts: 3,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by treis View Post
The first google hit for affirmative consent gives a page with this:



http://system.suny.edu/sexual-violen...ative-consent/

Your plan to:



Clearly violates that.
Consent is not a question, it is a state.

It my be useful to consider the other persons enthusiasm.

if you put your arm around someone and they lean in, or indicate enthusiasm in another way it is OK. If they freeze, look terrified or pull away you need to verbalize your question for consent or apologize for misreading the situation.

All one has to do is to only engage in physical contact with people who are clearly receptive to it at the time.

Non-action and passivity are simply not indicators of being receptive and/or consent.

Last edited by rat avatar; 12-10-2017 at 02:24 PM.
  #38  
Old 12-10-2017, 02:49 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 16,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
You might notice that your link discusses affirmative consent for sexual activity. Putting your arm around someone is not sexual activity.
Unless you're Al Franken.

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Okay, okay, don't shove!...I'll show myself out.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #39  
Old 12-10-2017, 03:31 PM
TriPolar TriPolar is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: rhode island
Posts: 37,805
Quote:
Originally Posted by treis View Post
That is a school policy that you have to consent to following in order for it to mean anything. They could make a policy that you need written permission before you even ask for verbal permission if they wanted to. I think it's perverted myself, I'd advise people to find schools that have a healthy attitude about sex.
  #40  
Old 12-10-2017, 11:51 PM
coffeecat coffeecat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 1,563
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
The people who are confused about what consent is, are all men. Women do not seem to be confused.
Women intuitively know if they're consenting. Men may have intuitions about whether the woman is consenting, (less so if they're young, like college age) but if a man is accused of sexual harassment or sexual assault, saying, "I intuitively knew she wanted it" won't help his case. So with all the media attention and talk of affirmative consent, even a man who always acts in good faith wants to know the new rules, and saying that it's just common sense doesn't help; it's like saying, "Just be a good person and you won't get arrested," or, "Just drive safely and you won't get stopped." You want to know the rules. This is especially true if you're dealing with a college or a job, which may have less rigorous ideas of due process and the rights of the accused than you'd get in a criminal trial.
Years ago, I worked in an office, where at first I acted all gentlemanly and disguised my true nature , until I discovered the women were going fast and furious with the sexual banter, so I figured, to hell with Puritanism, and bantered right back at them. It was clearly consentual and a fun job. I wouldn't do that today. Assholes and the clueless have ruined it, so now we can't have nice things.
  #41  
Old 12-11-2017, 08:58 AM
adaher adaher is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,764
If we're talking about this just as people trying not to be assholes, this is actually pretty easy. if you're on a date with a girl and you touch her in a nonsexual way, that's fine until she says to get your hands off her. Sexual contact requires consent beforehand. Easy stuff.

Where it gets tough is figuring out what will get you in actual trouble. it's actually pretty easy to screw up in the workplace and say things you wish you hadn't. I've committed many "microaggressions" out of ignorance in the workplace, and in some environments that's suffiicent to get your ass fired. Then there's misunderstandings. At school a girl once accused me of copping a feel when I bumped into her in the hallway. No administrative action, but I was pretty shocked, as I was at an age that it hadn't yet even occurred to me that I'd want to touch a girl. Ew.

So there are situations where you can have all the best intentions and still get yourself into trouble. I'm also seeing some discussion here about issues of consent that are not clear cut. For example, lying to get sex. Consent when both parties are drunk. Then there's purely transactional sex where both parties are willing but the woman still feels like she's being taken advantage of even if she initiated the deal. Although that's a good reason to simply refuse offers of sex for things like letting her backstage to see the band.

All of this would be pretty easy to navigate if it didn't involve official sanctions from your workplace or the government or if your career is public. Just TALK to each other and explain yourselves. We have language and vocal chords for this purpose, but sometimes I think we're just apes jabbering at each other for all the good it does sometimes.
  #42  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:14 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 34,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
Interesting. You can call it worse.

I call it professional and respectful.

It's not my job to hug or touch women at work.
Well, tru dat, but earlier you were a bit more expansive about what you felt you couldn't do anymore (bolding mine):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cartooniverse View Post
I can't comment on the O.P.'s remarks on dating. I'm 55. Cannot even imagine dating.

That said, the workplace? I've modified my behavior at work.

No eye contact.
Never smile at a female co-worker.

No physical contact of any kind, at any time, for any reason.
When walking down the weirdly narrow hallways behind the studio, if a woman is approaching, I stop.
Period.

I'm there to do my job. Not look at women. Long as I hew to that behavior, nobody can accuse me of anything.
No eye contact? While you're discussing something with a female colleague, if you're not looking at her face, where are you looking?

Never smile at a female co-worker? What's up with this? I don't know about you, but I smile at fellow human beings that I have a good relationship with, regardless of gender, even if that good relationship is strictly professional.

And I don't know about your job, but mine involves interaction with other human beings, which generally involves looking at them when that contact is in meatspace, which a fair amount of it still is. So looking at them is part of my job, yes.
  #43  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:18 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 34,311
I liked Anne Victoria Clark's suggestion to men for how to navigate interactions with women in workplace settings:
Quote:
While navigating professional relationships can often require that dreaded thing known as “any amount of work at all”, there is hope. You see, by following this one simple rule, you too can interact with women as people.

It’s as clear cut as this: Treat all women like you would treat Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson.

I know, this sounds weird, but trust me, this is a visualization exercise that will work wonders in your dealings with the women in your workplace. When a woman approaches you, just replace her in your mind with The Rock. Then, behave accordingly.
She goes on to give examples. They're worth reading.
  #44  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:19 AM
Nava Nava is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 37,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulfreida View Post
Still not clear, huh? Let me try one more time.

The people who are confused about what consent is, are all men. Women do not seem to be confused.

Men
subset A: confused about consent.
subset B: not confused about consent

Women
all not confused about consent

Does that work?
What doesn't work is that your response to Ritter began by "no".

Since you agree with Ritter, that "no" is out of place.

What's unclear is not your opinion, it's your English.
__________________
Life ain't peaches and cream, but sometimes it's laughing your ass off when you have no ass. - WhyNot
  #45  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:23 AM
adaher adaher is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I liked Anne Victoria Clark's suggestion to men for how to navigate interactions with women in workplace settings:
She goes on to give examples. They're worth reading.
See, and this is why I don't like the concept of "mansplaining" or "womansplaining". She assumes that if men just treated women the same way they treat men, everything would be just fine.

As men, we know this would go very badly. The last thing most women want is to be treated the way we treat our male co-workers. You do not slap women on the back, you do not even put a hand on their shoulders ideally. Most women don't like it when men get supercompetitive with them at work, although there are of course exceptions. But all men put up with competitive behavior at work from other men, whether they are super competitive themselves or not. Women tend to get angry about it. You do not make fun of women the way you make fun of your fellow men. For men, this is something we enjoy as part of a bonding experience. Most women don't like that, although as always there are exceptions.

But in general, treating women like the Rock is a quick road to the unemployment line.
  #46  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:42 AM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 34,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
See, and this is why I don't like the concept of "mansplaining" or "womansplaining". She assumes that if men just treated women the same way they treat men, everything would be just fine.

As men, we know this would go very badly. The last thing most women want is to be treated the way we treat our male co-workers. You do not slap women on the back, you do not even put a hand on their shoulders ideally.
I don't slap men on the back, or put a hand on a man's shoulder. Nor does anyone do this to me.

I'm trying to remember if I've ever even seen that happen in a workplace.
Quote:
Most women don't like it when men get supercompetitive with them at work, although there are of course exceptions. But all men put up with competitive behavior at work from other men, whether they are super competitive themselves or not. Women tend to get angry about it.
People can be anywhere they want to be on the cooperative/competitive axis. That has nothing to do with harassment.
Quote:
You do not make fun of women the way you make fun of your fellow men. For men, this is something we enjoy as part of a bonding experience. Most women don't like that, although as always there are exceptions.
I experience a certain amount of that in friendships outside of work. But not AT work.

Where the heck do you work? Does your commute involve a time machine back to 1966?
  #47  
Old 12-11-2017, 09:51 AM
adaher adaher is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,764
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
I don't slap men on the back, or put a hand on a man's shoulder. Nor does anyone do this to me.

I'm trying to remember if I've ever even seen that happen in a workplace.
People can be anywhere they want to be on the cooperative/competitive axis. That has nothing to do with harassment. I experience a certain amount of that in friendships outside of work. But not AT work.

Where the heck do you work? Does your commute involve a time machine back to 1966?
Okay, I misunderstood a little. It's true that if you treat all women like the Rock you won't get in trouble for harassment. You will, however, be hated by almost all women in your workplace.

As for physical touching, I don't see it much in an office environment, but in warehousing and food service it was pretty common for male supervisors to touch male workers. Part of this was that warehouses and food service can be noisy, so getting in close is often necessary and it just seems natural to put your hand on a shoulder or something when doing it, and maybe ending the conversation with a light pat of encouragement on the shoulder or back. Plus in such "unprofessional" environments, wrestling matches, friendly curse out conversations, and open discussions about one's love life in mixed company was common. Offices are a different environment, so everyone is usually ultra professional. But things can be more of a free for all when it's minimum wage employment.

Last edited by adaher; 12-11-2017 at 09:51 AM.
  #48  
Old 12-11-2017, 10:03 AM
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
IMO, consent isn't hard. None of the scenarios that I've heard expressed as confusing or challenging seem so to me. IMO, it depends on a lot of things, but it's pretty much all common sense.
The problem is, obviously, that "common sense" for (presumably) me and you is not universally "common sense."

I would bet that a large portion of the people in the news at the moment (and of those, famous and not, who are not in the news), thought that they were just doing something that was sort-of-kind-of ok. In their heads there was consent, and/or the infraction wasn't the sort where 'consent' even mattered, because it was "just a joke," "not a big deal," or something like that.

Consent is hard because common sense is hard. It's like saying, "saving for retirement isn't hard; it's easy. Just use some common sense!" Not everyone is equipped/trained with the same tools to understand or apply common sense.

If common sense were easy, or truly common, fewer women would be assaulted/harassed.
  #49  
Old 12-11-2017, 10:09 AM
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,098
Quote:
Originally Posted by adaher View Post
But all men put up with competitive behavior at work from other men, whether they are super competitive themselves or not. <snip> For men, this is something we enjoy as part of a bonding experience. Most women don't like that, although as always there are exceptions.
Some men hate it but go along because they want to fit in/get ahead, and some men resent the aggressive, assertive dicks who get to drive the social dynamic by virtue of being the most selfish and loud.

"We" don't enjoy it. It is not a universal bonding experience. It's a dominance play, and it only feels good to the winners (or those who convince themselves they are winners, or those who are sycophants).

Your understanding about all men and all women is narrow and wildly inaccurate.
  #50  
Old 12-11-2017, 10:14 AM
Doubticus Doubticus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: South-West
Posts: 339
I think just being polite will cover most of the issues. That said I think there are a lot of mixed messages in society for men. On one hand, society wants men to be sexless autometons, forever helpful and non-threatening. On the other, if men aren't assertive and dominating, then they are weak and ineffectual. Certainly, sexual abuse as predominantly conducted by men is a big problem and it is good that the #Metoo movement is saying enough is enough. But if we don't talk about the double standards for men, we are only solving half of a problem.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:44 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017