The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment Essay Example For Students

The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment Essay One of the most talked-about issues of the past few years has been the issue of sexual harassment, and it supposed prevalence in all workplaces. Pushed to the national spotlight by the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings, in which Ms. Hill accused her boss Justice Thomas of sexual harassment, it has become popular belief that sexual harassment occurs in all workplaces, and that the vast majority of female office -workers have been sexually harassed. Feminist groups have taken in upon themselves to interject in many offices, leading sensitivity training sessions on sexual harassment, and promoting the cause of those who charge others with sexual harassment. Despite the claims of feminist groups about merely educating and sensitizing people on sexual harassment, the new state guidelines have only succeeded in trivializing the issue, and are actually very detrimental to powerful women. We will write a custom essay on The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now According to a pamphlet by the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, one of the legally defined situations of sexual harassment involves such verbal conduct as making or using derogatory comments, epithets, slurs, and jokes. While such examples of speech may be considered offensive or crude behavior, it is not the role of the federal, state, or county government to legislate what people can say, and where they can say these things. By adopting verbal comments as part of the state guidelines on sexual harassment, the state of California is actually encouraging stifling free speech, which should be considered unconstitutional. If a woman walks in on a conversation between co-workers in an office, in which sexual jokes and lewd comments are featured, this does not constitute sexual harassment. Katie Roiphe, author of The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism, states it best when she proclaims that feminists.. .seem to have forgotten childhoods words of wisdom: sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never harm me (101). If a woman or man finds particular speech, jokes, or comments offensive, they should speak up, and voice their opposition, instead of crying harassment and calling their lawyer. As renegade feminist professor and society critic Camille Paglia proclaimed, in her book Vamps and Tramps, If someone offends you by speech you must learn to defend yourself by speech and not beg for outside help to curtail your opponents free movement (51). Sexual Harassment is Forbidden by Law continues its definition of sexual harassment, by proclaiming that verbal sexual advances or propositions are considered sexual harassment in California. While many people may consider this sexual harassment, this should be looked at as more about every day, normal behavior being considered criminal. If one finds another person attractive, regardless of position of power or status, a proposition is generally issued for a date, dinner, or cocktails. Asking your secretary out on a date is not sexual harassment, just as it would not be sexual harassment if the secretary asked the boss or co-worker out on a date. It should not be considered sexual harassment unless work-related advancement is denied to whomever refused the date offer. Author Katie Roiphe contends that a proposition for a date is normal, healthy behavior between a man and a woman. To find wanted sexual attention, you have to give and receive a certain amount of unwanted sexual attention. Clearly, the truth is that if no one was ever allowed to risk offering unsolicited sexual attention, we would all be solitary creatures (Roiphe 87). None of us would exist if no one ever risked unwanted sexual advances. The criminalization of innocent date propositions is another example of the trivialization of sexual harassment. By focusing on this type of proposition as typical of sexual harassment, feminists are demonstrating that their objective is not stamping out sexual harassment, but stamping out innocent heterosexual behavior. .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .postImageUrl , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:hover , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:visited , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:active { border:0!important; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:active , .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u80e6fea15c8f7b3262424fb773dcfacb:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Trail of tears Essay One final example of the extreme nature of the sexual harassment guidelines is its characterization of such visual conduct as leering, making sexual gestures, displaying of sexually suggestive objects or pictures, cartoons or posters as sexual harassment. It astounds me that anyone could support such a Stalinesque proposal. The banning of sexually suggestive objects or posters is a clear violation of our constitutional rights of freedom of speech and expression. As Camille Paglia once wrote, we can never fully legislate the human psyche (Vamps and Tramps, 47). Who is to determine what constitutes leering? This is, as Katie Roiphe wrote, an ominous, not to mention difficult, prospect (91). Our courts will be even more inundated with frivolous claims of sexual harassment, charging some man walking down the hall . The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment Essay Example For Students The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment Essay One of the most talked-about issues of the past few years has been the issue ofsexual harassment, and it supposed prevalence in all workplaces. Pushed to the nationalspotlight by the Anita Hill-Clarence Thomas hearings, in which Ms. Hill accused her bossJustice Thomas of sexual harassment, it has become popular belief that sexual harassmentoccurs in all workplaces, and that the vast majority of female office -workers have beensexually harassed. Feminist groups have taken in upon themselves to interject in manyoffices, leading sensitivity training sessions on sexual harassment, and promoting thecause of those who charge others with sexual harassment. Despite the claims of feministgroups about merely educating and sensitizing people on sexual harassment, the newstate guidelines have only succeeded in trivializing the issue, and are actually verydetrimental to powerful women. According to a pamphlet by the California Department of Fair Employment andHousing, one of the legally defined s ituations of sexual harassment involves such verbalconduct as making or using derogatory comments, epithets, slurs, and jokes. While suchexamples of speech may be considered offensive or crude behavior, it is not the role ofthe federal, state, or county government to legislate what people can say, and where theycan say these things. By adopting verbal comments as part of the state guidelines onsexual harassment, the state of California is actually encouraging stifling free speech,which should be considered unconstitutional. If a woman walks in on a conversationbetween co-workers in an office, in which sexual jokes and lewd comments are featured,this does not constitute sexual harassment. Katie Roiphe, author of The Morning After:Sex, Fear, and Feminism, states it best when she proclaims that feministsseem to haveforgotten childhoods words of wisdom: sticks and stones may break my bones, but nameswill never harm me (101). If a woman or man finds particular speech, jokes, orcomments o ffensive, they should speak up, and voice their opposition, instead of cryingharassment and calling their lawyer. As renegade feminist professor and society criticCamille Paglia proclaimed, in her book Vamps and Tramps, If someone offends you byspeech you must learn to defend yourself by speechand not beg for outside help tocurtail your opponents free movement (51). Sexual Harassment is Forbidden by Law continues its definition of sexualharassment, by proclaiming that verbal sexual advances or propositions are consideredsexual harassment in California. While many people may consider this sexual harassment,this should be looked at as more about every day, normal behavior being consideredcriminal. If one finds another person attractive, regardless of position of power or status, aproposition is generally issued for a date, dinner, or cocktails. Asking your secretary outon a date is not sexual harassment, just as it would not be sexual harassment if thesecretary asked the boss or co-wo rker out on a date. It should not be considered sexualharassment unless work-related advancement is denied to whomever refused the dateoffer. Author Katie Roiphe contends that a proposition for a date is normal, healthybehavior between a man and a woman. To find wanted sexual attention, you have to giveand receive a certain amount of unwanted sexual attention. Clearly, the truth is that if noone was ever allowed to risk offering unsolicited sexual attention, we would all besolitary creatures (Roiphe 87). None of us would exist if no one ever risked unwantedsexual advances. The criminalization of innocent date propositions is another example ofthe trivialization of sexual harassment. By focusing on this type of proposition as typicalof sexual harassment, feminists are demonstrating that their objective is not stamping outsexual harassment, but stamping out innocent heterosexual behavior. We will write a custom essay on The Myth of the Plague of Sexual Harassment specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now One final example of the extreme nature of the sexual harassment guidelines is itscharacterization of such visual conduct as leering, making sexual gestures, displaying ofsexually suggestive objects or pictures, cartoons or posters as sexual harassment. Itastounds me that anyone could support such a Stalinesque proposal. The banning ofsexually suggestive objects or posters is a clear violation of our constitutional rights offreedom of speech and expression. As Camille Paglia once wrote, we can never fullylegislate the human psyche (Vamps and Tramps, 47). Who is to determine whatconstitutes leering? This is, as Katie Roiphe wrote, an ominous, not to mention difficult,prospect (91). Our courts will be even more inundated with frivolous claims of sexualharassment, charging some man walking down the hall with harassment because hestared at her, or undressed her with his eyes. Imagine what such threats will do thesupposed team office environment. Instead of concentrating on producing the bestproduct possible, or in the best customer service, our offices will be focusing onmonitoring who watches what or whom, when, and how. If leering were a crime, then allof us would probably be in jail, charged with sexual harassment. As to the banning ofsexually suggestive posters or objects in the office, it astounds me that anyone would feelharassed by some little sexual toy on someones desk, or a pin-up photo on the lockerroom door. The last time I checked, the women who are complaining about such pin-upphotos or sexual toys cannot legally be prevented from putting up their own pin-ups orsexual toys. Apart from that, this part of the sexual harassment guidelines will lead tomuch absurdity and trouble, such as female students feeling sexually harassed byaphoto ofa graduate student bikini-clad wife (Paglia 50). While women who are reallybeing harassed see no action on their case, the women who are supposedly harassed by asexually explicit picture of a wife or girlfriend see immed iate action. This is anotherexample of the absurdity and ill feelings that such guidelines will bring to the officeenvironment. Many other issues related to sexual harassment demonstrate the extremes andabsurdities that advocates of the new sexual harassment guidelines are willing to advance,such as the wide use of sensitivity training in many offices, coporations, and agencies. .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .postImageUrl , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:hover , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:visited , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:active { border:0!important; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:active , .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39 .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u3d8968e71f953b2f3f3be138e5512c39:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Biotechnology EssaySensitivity training, which emerged as a widely used technique out of the ClarenceThomas-Anita Hill case, supposedly sensitizes men to the plight women face by sexualharassment. Yet, instead of legitimate education, sensitivity training becomes a way ofseeing the world, rather than a way of targeting specific contemptible behaviors (Roiphe100). Sensitivity training often includes role-playing exercises, such as that in the FAAexercise, in which men were pressured to walk through a line of female controllers whofondled their private parts and rated their sexual attributes (Men Sue FAA, A12). Christina Hoff -Sommers, author of the best-selling book, Who Stole Feminism, wasquoted in the Wall Street Journal as saying that most men and women in a workplaceenvironment can usually agree on core behavior they view as unacceptablebut some(sensitivity) trainers take the most thin-skinned, chronically offended person in a groupas the norm' (Olson A13). How does this type of indoctrination help to sensitize men orcondemn sexually harassing behavior? By choosing a thin-skinned person or theaverage man as a typical harasser, the feminists running these sensitivity trainingprograms are merely relaying stereotypes and propaganda to their predominantly maleaudiences, not realistic examples or helpful information. Instead of having a healthydialogue on what constitutes sexual harassment, or each persons perception ofharassment, these sensitivity training programs often result in an intolerance of diversityof points of view, leaving the audience not really want(ing) to object (Olson A13). Innot allowing an open debate on sexual harassment, feminists are merely just relaying theirview own, broadly defined of sexual harassment, regardless of reality. An open debate onsexual harassment in these sessions would be healthy, since all points of view would bewelcome, and all would get a better understanding of the issues and feelings. Thus, opendebate would actually sensitize people to the plight of victims of sexual harassment. Allof us would agree that harassment is horrid and must be condemned and halted. Giving afeminist a bully pulpit to sprout stereotypes about harassers, subjecting their students tooffensive language, situations and examples, does not do anything to educate aboutharassment, and actually introduces more tension, and lack of cohesion in the officeenvironment. Another issue related to sexual harassment is the view that women are sopowerless that they cannot withstand the advances of even subordinates without legalaction. Anita Hill, the darling of the f eminist-sexual harassment movement of the early1990s, proclaimed in a speech that women who report harassment often blamethemselves, a factor she attribute(s) to powerlessness' (Decker B6). This statementseems extremely degrading to women to assume that they are so weak and powerless thatthey cannot even reject innocent advances from their students, co-workers, or bosses. Camille Paglia put it best, when she stated that women are being returned to their oldstatus of delicate flowers who must be protected from assault by male lechers(and, thus)it is anti-feminist to ask for special treatment for women (Sex, Art, 47). Women havemade historical advances over the past twenty-five years, requiring them to have strongcharacter, will power, and great courage. For the feminist movement, which has been thesupposed champion of the advancement of all women, to proclaim that women are sodelicate and weak that they need special protection to repel these innocent advancesseems to go against everything the feminist movement has stood for. Great faith must beplaced in working women that they are strong and tough enough to repel date or sexualpropositions from their co-workers or students. Aside from that, women do have aresponsibility to define what (they) will and will not tolerate (Sex, Art, 47). If theperson who proposes is not given a clear signal that this behav ior is unacceptable,unwanted, or undesirable, how is that person to know to halt the behavior? Sexual harassment is widely viewed by many feminists as a national crisis, inwhich a majority of women have been supposedly been sexually harassed. Yet, thefeminist statisticians on sexual harassment report widely conflicting views of theprevalence of sexual harassment. The New York Times reported that 40 to 70 percent ofworking women have experienced some form of sexual harassment,but only 50 suitswere filed in fiscal year 1996 (Lewin, A18). Katie Roiphe writes of 88 percent ofPrincetons female students experiencing some form of sexual harassment(yet)Catherine MacKinnon (states) that only 7.8% of women in the United States are notsexually assaulted or harassed in their lifetimes (99-100). The wide variety in statisticsproves that feminists view what most consider innocent, everyday behavior as sexualharassment, even when consent is involved. If you consider leering, or lewd verbalcomments as elements of sexual harassment, then most of us have probably been sexuallyharassed at one point in our lifetime. Catherine MacKinnon has stated that feminismstresses the indistinguishability of prostitution, marriage, and sexual harassment (Brock385). Considering this statement, its easy to see how many leading feminists can come upwith the view that over eighty percent of women in this nation have been sexuallyharassed. Women leading normal lives, who tolerate or participate in telling lewd jokes orsexual conversations are considered to be sexually harassed, according to people like Ms. .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .postImageUrl , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:hover , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:visited , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:active { border:0!important; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:active , .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648 .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u0525045edb5e495615da11b285657648:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: A Modest Proposal: The Environment EssayMacKinnon. It would be interesting to see what Ms. MacKinnon would do whensomeone actually is assaulted, raped, or denied advancement as a result of sexual matters. That person would probably be ignored. Those in favor of the new sexual harassment guidelines, are creating an officeenvironment that is much more hostile to men than women, and may actually beencouraging reverse sexual harassment. Feminists always consider men potentialoppressors, and that given a chance, men will always sexually harass a woman, accordingto feminist definitions of sexual harassment. As a result, men are afraid to speak up in theoffice, or disagree with any woman, for fear of being labeled a sexual harasser. NationalReview best described the current situation the new sexual harassment guidelines haveimposed on many offices. Men are doubly penalized by the current alarm about sexual harassment. On theone hand, they are weakened to any office encounter with a woman because shealways holds the harassment trump card. On the other hand, the current interpretation of harassment law gives women license to say and do things in theworkplace to which men cannot respond in kind. There is an open hostility towardmen in many workplaces, and no one is rushing to document or change it (59).It sounds as if these new sexual harassment guidelines are encouraging reverseharassment on the part of women against men. Where is the call for sensitivity training ofwomen? Where are the calls for legislation outlawing looking at men, or saying anythingprovocative or unsolicited to them? This is clearly an example of a movement that hasgotten out of hand into an anti-male frenzy, ignoring any evidence contrary to theirposition. The movement for new guidelines on sexual harassment is detrimental to officecohesion, degrades the adva ncement of women, assuming their lack of power. Leaders ofthis movement assume that all males are potential harassers, and that they will harassinnocent females given a chance, according to their definitions. Instead of legislatingunconstitutional measures that stifles free speech and free expression, feminist leadersshould encourage an open forum on sexual harassment in many offices, which is the onlytrue way for all to gain and understanding of the issue at hand, and truly becomesensitized. Works Cited1. Brock, David. The Real Anita Hill. New York: The Free Press, 1993. 2. California Department of Fair Employment and Housing. Sexual Harassment isForbidden By Law. Pamphlet, Dec. 1998. 3. Decker, Cathleen. We Believe You, 900 Women Tell Anita Hill at Convention. LosAngeles Times 16 Nov. 1991: B6. 4. Lewin, Tamar. A Case Study of Sexual Harassment. New York Times 11 Nov. 1997:A18. 5. Luthar, Harsh and Anthony Townsend. Man Handling. National Review 6 Feb. 1997:58-60. 6. Men Sue FAA, Say They Were Groped. Los Angeles Times 8 Sep. 1994: A12. 7. Olson, Walter. When Sensitivity Training Is the Law. Wall Street Journal 20 Jan. 1993: A13. 8. Paglia, Camille. Sex, Art, and American Culture. New York: Vintage Press, 1992. 9. Paglia, Camille. Vamps and Tramps. New York: Vintage Press, 1994. 10. Roiphe, Katie. The Morning After: Sex, Fear, and Feminism. Boston: Little, Brown Company, 1993.