“Take your stinking paws off me you damn dirty ape!”
I snipped this because I am genuinely confused. If truly all the guy did was “a light non-sexual touch, a random greeting, or simple eye contact” then how do those actions, in and of themselves, turn “into full blown harassment”? Surely the guy did something in addition to that or those things to make you feel that he is a creep.
If not, how do you tell the difference between a creep and a regular person? If so, then it is those other things that should be focused upon, not the prior activities.
Even if this happened, this is why people hate HR and modern workplace policies. The first question to Sally should be if she tried to work it out with Dave or even mentioned to Dave that she had an issue with it. That is how reasonable adults attempt to resolve any problem.
Possibly a followup question asking Sally if there is any reason she would be afraid to mention it to Dave, but again, we have to presume that adults are capable of acting like adults and not treat everyone like 8 year olds on the playground.
Why does HR need to ask Sally what her “boundaries of touch” are? Presumably the company hires mentally competent people who are capable of communicating that to co-workers. After Sally’s answer, should HR send a company memo out that you can touch Sally this way in this context, but certainly not in that way in that context?
That’s not how English works. Every “talk to your doctor about X” advertisment on the TV is also not making a diagnosis.
I never addressed your wants. I addressed a physiological affect you described as resulting from unexpectd (not unwanted) touch. A well-studied phenomenon involving a brain stem response. This phenomenon is common in response to certain auditory input. It is not common in response to incidental tactile input. Most people who do not want to be touched do not experience this phenomenon.
There have been many reasons offered in this thread as to why physical contact should be minimized at work. Some better than others. This particular reason is not a good one.
I gotta say, Thorny has made it pretty clear that they’re not down with the “see a doctor” business. Seems easy enough to respect, and continuing down that path despite knowing they’re not appreciating it is emblematic.
And I’m not down with being told, multiple times, that I’ve written something that I’ve not.
There is a definite non-zero number of folks annoyed by whistling of any kind, compounded by the whistler breaking into song. :eek::smack:
The likelihood of co-workers asking a whistler/singer/hummer to knock it off is inversely proportional to how much they are outranked on the food chain by such a person. A clerical worker in a physician’s office probably won’t tell the doc to STFU.
What if you work in a massage parlor?
You really seem to be overreacting to it though. Maybe talk to your doctor about this, huh?
I think there’s supposed to a joke there, but actually it’s a great point. Any massage therapist worth their salt will ask the client to stop any touch that’s uncomfortable. The norm is touching, but communication, and respect for that communication, is key. If the massage therapist screws up within norms (e.g., uses too hard pressure), then it’s the touchee’s job to communicate that, and the therapist will change their behavior. If the massage therapist screws up outside of norms (e.g., gropes genitals), then the therapist should face discipline/prosecution.
So, yeah, thanks I guess for the example.
I was thinking of the guys that do stuff like hold eye contact for an uncomfortably long period of time or outright stare at you,or inject a sexually suggestive or hostile tone of voice into normal conversational phrases. Have you really never met that guy?
The problem is that you can have a set of “edge-case” behaviors that all together create harassment but that individually sound like you’re being overly-sensitive and arrogant to even bring up (arrogant because "you think YOU are just so attractive men can’t control themselves around you?). And it’s a horrible catch-22: if you start listing ALL the things, you sound like a crazy psycho who is just looking for things to bitch about.
This is intensified by the fact that as a society, we give men the benefit of the doubt more than women. When a man hears a story about such a guy, he imagines his own innocuous actions being misinterpreted and he feels vicariously abashed and defensive. He can’t imagine any reason he would do such a thing. So he makes incredible excuses and looks for reasons to doubt the woman’s experience or her interpretation of the experience. But that Good Man who is projecting isn’t the creep and doesn’t understand the creep’s motives because he’s not a creep.
It raises an excellent point relevant to context. There can be a mismatch between the intention of communicative touch and how it is interpreted, perhaps even more than with written and spoken words. Part of the context that can contribute to the mismatch is the perceived power levels of the members of the dyad, which may be different for the different members. (A male may feel that they are equal peers, and they are on the org chart, but the woman still feel that male is more powerful, for example.)
So sure someone who uses communicative touch should be very aware that a perceived power imbalance may set up a benignly intended non-sexual, non-aggressive touch to be misunderstood.
But that is very different than a blanket rule of no casual communicative touch without expressed consent.
Should I not hum because a person subordinate to me may be bothered but reticent to speak up? If they are afraid to confront me should they go to HR to handle the issue for them?
Yeah, I’ve decided that the only response I need to make to DrDeth is best reserved for a more appropriate forum.
ETA: I apologize for this being my first post in the thread, but I was trying to read the whole thing before posting, and there was** a lot** of DrDeth to wade through or skip past.
DrDeth, it really sounds like you’ve had a bad experience in the past which colors your perception of any interaction with HR. In most places they’re going to handle it like Left Hand of Dorkness outlined. Assuming both Mr. McFeely and Susan are acting in good faith there’s just no reason to punish anyone or get rid of either one of them. Here’s a pro tip: Turnover is expensive especially when it’s unexpected and depending on how long the employee has been here a lot of knowledge is walking out that door with them. Getting rid of good employees for what amounts to nothing isn’t protecting the company it’s making things worse.
That would be one of our first questions.
That would certainly be one of our questions. Honestly, if anyone came in with Susan’s complaint my immediate impression would be that there is more to to this than just touching a wrist. i.e. For whatever reason they don’t generally get along with one another.
We ask questions to get a better understanding of what’s going on and where the employee is coming from. And most people who make complaints to HR really want to feel as though someone is listening to them. But, no, we’re not going to send out a memo company wide regarding a single employee.
I’m closing this thread to evaluate later. Been a busy weekend. I know for certain however that if you want to complain about moderation, this is not the place to do it. If I’m not mistaken, you’ve been ramping this up lately so I will caution you that you should desist.
[/moderating]
This happens frequently in GD. Correcting someone’s error is perfectly fine. Continuing on suggesting that someone suffers from mental illness is not appropriate however. Please don’t do that.
[/moderating]
This is a warning for personal insults. If you want to rail against another poster, the Pit is the appropriate place. If you want to discuss moderation, ATMB is the appropriate place.
[/moderating]
I’m re-opening this thread because I think there is an interesting topic on what level of contact may or may not be appropriate, when, how, etc.
[/moderating]
I want to make it very clear- it is perfectly Ok to be annoyed or bothered by casual touching in a business environment. Just ask that they don’t do that first, don’t run to HR first.