There have been a few excellent posts, most notably:

Pericles, Shadow Minister, Suzeonline, Pelican, CJ Morgan, all of whom have made the point that persistent unwanted behaviour from one person to another is harassment and illegal, which was the primary topic of MTR's article.

I note others apparently are arguing for freedom to harass their female colleagues as much as they get off on trolling these pages. Else why the detailed discussion about women's dress and appearance?

I have made all the points I wished to make at the beginning of this thread:

1. MTR could've written a more comprehensive article on harassment in the workplace - it is not just male to female, although that is the majority, but also male to male, female to female and so on.

2. Interestingly (or perhaps appallingly) it is the same posters who consistently denigrate females across the length and breadth of OLO who also deny the problem that is workplace bullying. Once again they protest too much.

Sadly, Jon J, I doubt it is information that would help you.

>>If you have any way to tell in advance whether a woman is going to take a particular comment as flattering flirtation or sexual harassment, please let me know: I could use the information.<<

The answer is of course to use common sense, and a level of respect commensurate with the relationship status quo.

But the problem actually lies in the fact that you have to ask the question in the first place.

Lisbeth

The main people who troll on the internet, are those who dismiss the opinions of others as trolling without making any effort to engage with their ideas.

Others

It may well be true that the legal definition of sexual harassment emphasises its repetitive aspect. However, boundaries about sexual harassment are enforced more by social pressure than by laws. My point is that in everyday life, many women routinely complain about one advance from some men, as though the advance is the problem, when the particular man is the problem. I'm happy to discuss the social conventions that serve to regulate society, but lets be honest about how they work and more importantly, lets have the same boundaries for everyone.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10515#172931

JamesH, good point, actually an old friend, found out his wife was telling everybody, like her female friends, little sister, etc. That he was a bastard, loser, etc. Apparently the only reason they lived a comfortable lifestyle was because she worked full time.

Nothing to do with him being the most successful Real Estate Salesman in the entire country & earning a small fortune every week. Must not have been too keen on competition, i suppose.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10515#172937

Cornflower, Very good. Between 1945 & 1965 all of our essential government services like schools, hospitals, roads, water, etc, were close to, dare i use the weasel words, "World's Best Practice" now all of the states, territories are crying poor, muttering darkly about how to afford "Infrastructure", for our growing population?

How fast was our population growing then? Oh yes families of 1 to 3 were quite rare, families of 6 to 12 were quite normal & there was a tsunami of immigration from Britain & Europe as well?

Maybe dozens of the things governments do now are not really so essential after all?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10515#172940

ALGOREisRICH, Excellent work but i don't think any of the "Sistas in Da Hood" will answer any of it, too factual for them, & what happens when we look down the list, at all the comments after yours. Not 1 single reply or reasonable debate of any point you raised?

BTW, did you catch my earlier post on another thread?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10518#172862

If you or any of the other AFL members want a really good laugh try this one.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10383#170422

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10515#172943

Proxy, Amen brother. They still have not worked out yet that Fe"Man"Nazism was/is in fact misogynist.

http://www.themonthly.com.au/monthly-essays-louis-nowra-exclusive-germaine-greer-and-female-eunuch-2309

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10515#172960

lisbeth salander, poor dear girl, there, there, now.

They disagree with the Dogma, i was brainwashed with, so they must be hateful/filled trolls. I note that many of us have written lengthy, carefully thought out opinion's & you are in fact the one with short, sarcastic remarks, devoid of any debate, intelligent or otherwise.

Pots & Kettles, or as i like to call them "old wives tales.

What seems to be lacking from what has once again become a polarised debate is that it's not one size fit's all.

The scenario's which come to mind are
1/ Those who lack any form of personal standards or respect and stare (conspicuously) and or make inappropriate comments regardless of the choices women make.
2/ Women who perhaps have been more generously endowed than others. They may get so many stares that they have become sensitive about the issue. At the same time it's hard to downplay their breasts with clothing etc.
3/ Women who wear clothing in a workplace or similar environment which emphasises their breasts (extra tight, plunging neckline etc) and who enjoy the response.
4/ Women who wear clothing in a workplace or similar environment which emphasizes their breasts (extra tight, plunging neckline etc) and who don't enjoy the response.
5/ Women who choose (for whatever reason) to work in a workplace where they are required to emphasise their bodies (Hooters etc)
6/ Men who will try to be discrete in all of the above situations but sometimes are more obvious than they might choose to be.

I suspect that "the usual suspects" are mostly talking about the women in group 4 and considering themselves to be part of group 6 and others are talking about group's 1 and 2 and considering "the usual suspect" to be part of group 1.

R0bert

Robert

We all understand that different people have different ideas. However, occasionally society sets limits on acceptable behaviour. For example, women shouldn't have to put up with this type of harassment. If we are going to have social conventions, governing acceptable behaviour, the rules need to be simple and applied consistently.

Several people have suggested that men should leave the poor girl alone if she rejects the first approach. While this seems fair, we all know so many men who have broken this rule and got the girl that we should be stunned that any men follow this rule. Simone Warne snubbed Shane several times, before agreeing to a first date. If women want this rule to be followed, they must never. ever reward this type of persistence and encourage others to do the same.

This "choice" model of feminism may be user-friendly, but some choices can only be seen as letting the team down.