Hacker News Reader

Comment by sheraz | Hacker News Reader

Office environments today are like minefields. A man never knows when his next step, word, or simple action will be misconstrued as harassment.

Hold a door? Thats harassment.

Wink ;-) in an email or IM? Thats harassment.

Tell an off-color joke? Thats harassment.

Complement female coworkers outfit? Thats harassment.

Stand too close in an elevator or inline at the canteen? Thats harassment.

Getting caught looking looking at a female coworkers boobs? Thats harassment.

The problem is that at the end of the day it is all up to how that female employee "feels." If she is especially sensitive, then everyone around her has to walk on eggshells.

Why can't anyone have a sense of humor about any of this?

I think I'm going to watch 9 to 5 with Dolly Parton tonight, just to remember a time when people had a sense of humor about dealing with toxic office culture.

View on HN

> Hold a door?

I don't think holding a door has ever been seriously considered harassment. Yes, some people do get upset by it.

> Wink ;-) in an email or IM?

If you need emoticons in professional correspondence you should probably rethink what you're trying to say. I also don't think an emoticon has ever been considered harassment.

> Tell an off-color joke?

A. What's your definition of off-color?

B. Unless you're a comedian, you probably shouldn't be telling racist/sexist/offensive jokes at work anyway.

> Complement female coworkers outfit?

Unless you're working in fashion I don't think you have any reason to do this, especially if it's not someone you wouldn't consider a friend. Here's a good rule: If you don't have a "chat on the weekends" type of relationship with someone, you probably shouldn't be commenting on their personal appearance at work.

> Stand too close in an elevator or inline at the canteen?

I think everyone can imagine that this has been done intentionally to make someone uncomfortable, especially in an elevator or in line.

> Getting caught looking at a female coworkers boobs?

Of course it's harassment, Jesus.

> Why can't anyone have a sense of humor about any of this?

I know, right?! I mean, I was just standing half an inch away from you in an empty elevator, commenting on how you were dressed and staring at your chest. Have a sense of humor about it!

...I think we have butted heads in other threads... ;-)

I get emojis from our legal and marketing teams all the time. It is a part of office culture in many / most places I would imagine.

Here is my off-color joke:

Q. How many feminists does it take to screw in a light bulb?

A. One. AND THATS NOT FUNNY!

Yes, I can complement anyone I like. I don't need to have a pre-existing relationship to do so.

Here is the problem -- there are so many unintentional actions that occur. I might be in a hurry and reach across someone in the canteen. Rude? Perhaps. Harassment, nope.

> Yes, I can complement anyone I like. I don't need to have a pre-existing relationship to do so.

What if the other person doesn't want to hear your opinion or complements regarding a personal quality of his/her, would you stop and keep it to yourself or just keep embarrassing yourself till someone puts you in your right place?

Well, if it is about me then I can take a hint. I don't need to step on the same landmine twice.

Others might need an assist.

The point being is that I don't need permission to tell someone something that I think is innocuous, such as a complement.

Are you in the habit of extending those innocuous compliments equally to both men and women?

i don't see how that would matter. Do women divvy up their complements equally between men and women? I bet not.

Come on, that is bullshit. Simply, don't go out of your way to be an asshole. Genuine compliments are fine. Leering is wrong. Sexually suggestive comments or winks in emails are wrong. Don't treat anyone as a lesser form of life. This is so fucking simple and it makes for a better work environment for all.

So what are you supposed to do if you are attracted to someone at work, never make a move? Women need to be more forgiving and take it as a compliment, unless someone continues after a clear rejection (which is the definition of harassment).

You do not need a "clear rejection" to make something harassment. If I've never spoken to someone but I spend ten minutes a day staring at her chest, that's harassment.

If I ask someone out, they say yes, and keep rescheduling 100 times, me continuing to ask them out and not take the (subtle, non-obvious) hint is still harassment.

Looking at someone is harassment now? I must have harassed hundreds of women then, What about thinking about them?

If you are leering at someone day in and day out that is harassment. Is that really a difficult point to understand?

I'm not talking about a glance because a woman is wearing a new shirt. That's not harassment, nobody ever said it was, and asserting otherwise is a straw man. But ogling the hot girl every day is.

Only if it's someone you aren't interested in, if a hot guy you liked made eye contact a few times and smiled it would make your day. Am I right?

Well I'm a married heterosexual man, so the universe of "hot guys I like" is pretty small.

And I don't know why you insist on continuing to argue against points I'm not making. I'm saying continued unwanted advances = harassment, regardless of the existence or lack of "clear rejection." If you flirt with someone at work (what exactly are you being paid to do?) and they reciprocate, it's not unwanted. If you do it once and they don't reciprocate, and you stop, it's not continued.

So it's not the act that's harassment, it's the relative level of attractiveness of the person committing the act. Interesting.

You are either being willfully ignorant or a troll (or both). Nowhere did I even intimate that attractiveness has anything to do with anything.

> I'm saying continued unwanted advances = harassment

Reciprocation will be more likely if the person making the advance is more attractive relative to target of the advance. I'm sure there is a mathematical formula for this.

First, I have been in work relationships and they aren't all they are cracked up to be. They make coworkers uncomfortable and create all sorts of weird situations that my little monkey brain can't process. Unless you are very very strict about boundaries (ie - from 8-5 we are at work, we only work, and outside of those hours we are only in a relationship and we don't talk about work), these relationships are a minefield.

Seriously, if they go bad, they go very bad. If they work, they can be great. But please be careful!

That aside, it depends on your relative levels and how closely you work together.

1. If you are a manager who is attracted to one of your reports, it is never acceptable to flirt. If you can't resist, quit your job first.

2. If you are attracted to your manager, be very very careful. He or she may worry that they have harassed you and that kind of worry makes any sort of positive resolution very difficult. There's a good chance that one of you will end up transferred to a totally unrelated team. If you like your job, it isn't worth taking this kind of a crapshoot.

3. If you are at the same level, ask yourself if you are mature enough to maintain a good working relationship if he or she rejects you. Then, take some time to think over the worst case scenarios. How will you react if you two date for a year, you are madly in love and he or she breaks up with you?? Will you let that boil over into your work world?? What if there is infidelity? What will you talk about outside of work?? If you only have work in common, tread lightly - one of you will move up or out. Then what?? What happens if he or she gets promoted? Will you feel jealous or proud?? Once you have thought carefully about those things, tell him or her how you feel (preferably outside of work hours) and ask him or her out. If the date goes well and you want to go on another date, tell your manager quickly. If the date goes horribly, be cool and don't let it change the working relationship.

Also, for the love of whatever you consider holy. If all goes well, don't do any of that cute dating bullshit at work!! Don't hold hands. Don't call each other pet names. Don't get caught making out in the supply closet!!! :)

No it is not bullshit.

This whole topic is filled with loaded words like "harassment" and "victim."

Furthermore, workplace harassment laws are tipped in the females favor. If she even perceives something, then it happened.

If you think that sending a wink to someone is treating them as a lower life form, then I don't think there is much I can say...

You are wrong. Sexual harassment laws are somewhat tipped in the victim's favour, but only because law in general is tipped slightly in the victim's favour. This is not about laws favouring women, it is just about how the law works.

Simply, the victim's feelings matter.

There is a difference between a wink and a wink after something sexually suggestive. If you can't understand that difference then yeah, there's nothing else I can say.

And there in lies the problem -- we are legislating about "feelings."

We have delegated to the state what our personal responsibility should have been all along.

"Hey, asshole -- keep it in your pants or I will tell the whole office that you went through an Asian-fetish. Now can we discuss this TPS report or not?"

Secondly, a wink after something sexually suggestive is a little redundant, wouldn't you say?

You have stopped trying to be productive and are just being argumentative now. Your third and fourth paragraphs are in particularly poor taste.

I don't understand what is so difficult here. Her manager harassed her and the fear and embarrassment that she felt were real. If the genders were reversed, the result would have been the same. That is because in a civilized society, if you act in a way that makes someone uncomfortable, there needs to be accountability.

This whole topic is unproductive. We are "having an argument on the internet" :-)

> law in general is tipped slightly in the victim's favour

Not really, at least in the US it's tipped in the innocent person's favor (i.e. innocent until proven guilty).

> Simply, the victim's feelings matter.

So, if I'm hurt by how stupid what you wrote is, should you be lose your job or be jailed?

Basing laws on feelings is the most stupid and abuse-prone idea I've ever heard.

> Not really, at least in the US it's tipped in the innocent person's favor (i.e. innocent until proven guilty).

That is only in the criminal system. And, that truism has nothing to do with what we are discussing. Even in the criminal system, if you yell, "I'm going to kill you" and run at me with a knife, you may feel that you are joking. But, if I feel fear for my physical safety, my feeling of fear overwhelms your feeling that it was a joke.

You're also not thinking through the entire system. You seem to be under the belief that criminal/tort law requires an actual physical injury. That is simply not the case.

> So, if I'm hurt by how stupid what you wrote is, should you be lose your job or be jailed?

> Basing laws on feelings is the most stupid and abuse-prone idea I've ever heard.

And, that is why we have lawyers and judges.

Consider laws about assault. Assault does not require actual physical harm in order to be a criminal or tortious act. It only requires two elements:

- the assaulter needs to demonstrate intent. This requires more than words.

- the victim needs to feel fear for his/her safety.

Or, let's consider laws about sexual harassment. In the United States, simple teasing is not illegal, but it can become illegal if it creates an offensive or hostile work environment. The feeling has to be justified (hence the role of judges and lawyers), but it is still all about feelings and reactions.

You should read the US civil rights act. It's well written and quite interesting.

I think it's obvious but I'm neither American not a lawyer.

Do you, by any chance, often use the word "SJW" and not in an ironic way?

If you think her actual claims are not harassment, then argue that.

I think the first problem is that harassment is a loaded term. It implies more than what actually happened.

Harassment, to me, is what bill collectors and bullys do. They call you repeatedly, they post about you on social media. They follow you home.

Why not call it this -- her boss is an asshole, and she didn't call him out on it.

s/A man/Oblivious Sheraz/

Reply on news.ycombinator.com