That’s cool. It just seems that according to him, his hand ended up inside of her shirt. Just doesn’t seem likely.
Dude should be officially sanctioned for those eyebrows.
I mean, a shirt like this would make it possible. I’m not saying he’s telling the whole truth here, but I don’t think that particular detail is actually impossible.
I stand by my position that they’re no way they decided to sever ties with him over a single incident of casually touching a coworker on the back, especially after having an independent firm review the complaints FROM MULTIPLE WOMEN. And I think that insinuating that anyone who objects to a superior putting his hand inside a woman’s shirt against her wishes considers women ‘weak’, or that sexual harassment is not serious is a gross argument for allowing sexual harassment. Calling a superior putting his hand inside a subordinate’s shirt ‘sexual harassment’ is not an insult to anyone other than the harasser, and in that case it’s a justified insult.
I also wonder how many people saying that him putting his hand in her shirt is no big deal would say the same thing if it was a case where a big, flamboyantly gay man did the same thing to a dude in a bar, and the dude punched out the gay guy. I am pretty sure most of the ‘no big deal types’ would expect a punch for the gay guy sliding his hand through a hole in a guy’s shirt to touch his skin, and would not be at all surprised that the dude in the bar felt sexually harassed and reacted angrily.
Are we speaking on Minnesota or National Public Radio?
When I read it, I was wondering if she moved somehow, or bent over. Say her shirt-tail was untucked and, instead of the small of the back, his hand touched skin. And she moved somehow that made it “move up a couple of inches.” But I agree, it is hard to imagine what is described.
Fine, pan. We view things differently. I imagine more details will come out. The story I read was ambiguous. One place it mentioned 2 complaints, but later said “no other complaints.”
Again: look at the shirt I linked to above. Shirts in this style are reasonably common, and if you’re trying to pat someone’s back, it’d be pretty easy to hit bare skin. If you’re coming in with a pat from the side, some sort of side-hug pat thing, ending up with your hand under the fabric is pretty easy to imagine.
You should read the story linked in the OP. It says explicitly that there were two staffers complaining, and also explicitly points out that his account only addresses one of the two. There really is no ambiguity there.
Also, I notice you didn’t comment on my hypothetical other situation. If a flamboyantly gay guy put his hand inside of another guy’s shirt in a bar, would you expect the guy to take that as a sexual gesture and not be surprised if the feelee punched the feeler? You seem to feel that it’s absurd to consider ‘hand inside the shirt’ sexual harassment, but I think it pretty obviously is something that is a sexual type of touch under most circumstances.
And to repeat the question I find interesting, here’s a man’s shirtthat leaves considerable back exposed. If a guy who appeared gay were to come up to a guy wearing this shirt in a bar and go to ‘pat his back’ but ended up with his hand inside the shirt, do you think the guy would take it as a come-on? Would you be surprised if the guy threw a punch in response?
It’s actually MPR, not NPR, I got them mixed up in my comments.
I take your point, but that shirt doesn’t really work: you’d really have to work at it to get your hand inside that shirt, given its tight fit. There are a lot of women’s shirts with loose-hanging fabric where it could happen accidentally.
But yeah, it’d be very easy for it to happen as a sleazy come-on as well. If someone patted the bare back of a dude wearing a muscle shirt, I’d consider violence to be wholly unwarranted, but I’d also expect recoiling and serious stink-eye to the patter.
I don’t think it’s as simple as that. I absolutely loathe physical contact with anyone apart from close family. No good reason, I’m just twitchy that way. But the fact is a lot of people incorporate touching into expressions of friendship. It took a while for my coworkers to understand I wasn’t unfriendly, just not touchy. Despite being up front about my preferences, I’ve gotten used to the fact I’m going to get back-patted & hugged at work and that my skin is going to crawl off my bones and huddle in a corner as a result. Alternately, they understand I value them as friends despite avoiding physical, even eye contact. The thing is, if they were to ‘start respecting my boundaries’ I can’t say I would feel better about the situation because I would feel some level of estrangement from them.
That said, I have yet to have someone place their hand anywhere on my back that felt inappropriately familiar. I guess it’s all about knowing your audience.
Are these allegations being believed with just “he said, she said”? While I don’t doubt these allegations, if a woman wanted to get a guy in trouble, it seems that now she would be believed if she made something up. I guess that is to be weighed against women now being believed. I believe Anita Hill.
It does? I couldn’t find it.
Give it 9-12 months and no guy, anywhere, will have an important job at all (except Trump).
Do you believe that all men are harassing women constantly? Or only powerful men?
I saw Keillor perform live once, at a private party for publishing professionals in Manhattan about 20 years ago. He did a dialogue based on a fictional correspondence between Walt Whitman and Oscar Wilde.
Today’s news was surprising, because he did such I good job that I’ve assumed he was gay ever since.
Here’s the MPR press release. Am I missing something? Bolding mine.
Serious where are you reading what you are reading?
I have no idea what the truth is. I see every reason why in the current climate, especially in Minnesota with the Franken thing going on, MPR would rather be seen as responding vigorously than be seen as anything other than fully supporting the #metoo movement. To question any presumed victim, to give any benefit of the doubt to an accused, is right now being seen as enabling abuse and as being part of the poblem.
The climate at this very precise movement is guilty unless proven innocent and zero tolerance. And no question there are likely very many guilty ones out there. But the presumption of guilt by some without knowing what the single accusation even is seems like a wee bit of an overcorrection in response.
And male here but yes I have been touched at work without giving my express consent ahead of time. Coworkers and colleagues (more often females) touching my hand or shoulder while emphasizing a point. And when expressing condolences when my mom dies. Or at a meeting someone, who is actually superior to me in the organization, who I have not seen in a bit, giving me a hug and a peck on the cheek. No, no flirting was involved. No it was not harassing me. Could I have been someone to whom any touch was offensive? Sure. I’m not but I could have been.
As to the “don’t touch” admonition …
Physical touch is NOT a bad thing and creating a world in which it must be completely avoided without explicit consent, in which any touch is potentially to be viewed as assault, in which you simply would never dare touch outside of an intimate relationship … would be a very bad result.
Human touch is important. It is a normal part of communication and part of how we express empathy. If I was sharing something sad with a coworker their touching my hand or my shoulder would not be something that should require explicit permission given to do.
Yes.
Horse pucky. I don’t touch people at work, nor do they touch me.
Most of them break things that I have to repair. :dubious:
Not everyone agrees with you and those who disagree are not all skeevy.
You may, or may not, find this New Yorker article of interest.
Well and possibly “dangerous” in the case of adults as well.