We are unique

"I do not mix business with pleasure in any situation. That has been motto working with thousands of people throughout my career. Do not take it personally".

That is what I mean, when I talk about a workable policy.

Pelican

"Sexual harassment is based on the feelings and perceptions of the person being harassed. What might constitute harassment to one may not to another."

That is what I mean, when I talk about an unworkable policy. Behaviour may either be grounds for sacking or the first step towards marriage. Furthermore, it isn't possible to tell until after the action.

Anti

Why it is not possible to move away from an expectation that he pursues. Our society has made all sorts of changes for various reasons. What many women want is for this guy to chase them but not him or him. That can never work.

Benk:"That is what I mean, when I talk about a workable policy."

It's workable, but only on an individual level. Trying to legislate for such a policy must fail, since some people evidently DO mix business and pleasure.

Benk:"Why it is not possible to move away from an expectation that he pursues. Our society has made all sorts of changes for various reasons."

I assume you're asking that as a question. I say it's not possible because we, as Homo Sapiens Sapiens are at the mercy, to a large degree, of our in-built drives. A male dog has sex with something that smells like a female dog on heat and she accepts his advances because he smells like a male dog and acts interested, or is simply the only candidate: a male peacock has sex with a peahen that responds with approval to his display of fine plumage and demonstrates it through body language and vocalisations. These sexual behaviours cannot be easily changed and they define, to a very great degree, what makes a species. Small changes can have great effects: think of the famous Darwinian finches of the Galapagos, which share very similar genomes and arise from common stock, but in which little things like beak length are critical to sexual selection.

I think that the "male as initiator" model is as hardwired as the dog's way of doing things is for them. yes, there is lots of variation, but that is the norm. I'm sure that an analysis of all human sexual encounters would reveal a normal curve centred on that model. It is so engrained that the "bull dyke" is a pseudo-male archetype that functions on the same level.

I say it is not significantly changeable, no matter how much "social constructionalism" is applied.

Ah, here we go. It's biology.

Deteriorating fast. I don't want an argument about it anti, it's just this has been argued over to death.

I'm with benk,

'"Sexual harassment is based on the feelings and perceptions of the person being harassed. What might constitute harassment to one may not to another."

That is what I mean, when I talk about an unworkable policy. Behaviour may either be grounds for sacking or the first step towards marriage. Furthermore, it isn't possible to tell until after the action.'

This is my problem with it all. I can handle anti-groping, and anti threats (explicit) as they are cut and dried. (Though other laws already exist for this). The rest comes under, 'I feel X, so you must change'. Two people interact, and one person's feelings about it all criminalises another? Bizarre.

anti,

'Can anyone tell me why the feelings of a woman who has been "harassed" by an unwanted chat-up are more important than the feelings of a man who may have to stop himself from chatting up the woman he thinks is a pretty good sort? '

I'd say more that if a guy chats a girl up at work and upsets her, then it's sexual harassment. If a guy chats up a girl, and she's really rude about rejecting him and laughs at him and tells all her friends and they all laugh behind his back and upsets him, well, that's just bad luck for the guy.

'What is happening more and more is that women expect to be able to behave as they like without[sic] impunity, while men are being constrained by punitive laws. '

Yep.

Dear Houellie,

What most people expect is a safe working
environment!

Perhaps you should google "sexual harassment
in Australia," and find out what the laws
clearly state and why.

You'd get a better understanding of what
people are actually talking about.

We're talking about the theory of the idea, on an abstract or philosophical level Foxy. Nobody is arguing about clear cut cases you keep mentioning.

Like the anti-terrorism laws and how they can easily be covered by existing laws, and are really an excuse to curb civil liberties; The same goes for sexual harassment.

Now obviously for some men are seen as terrorists and needing special laws to regulate how they are supposed to ask women out, but some of us don't think there is a need.

There's sexual assault and blackmail laws to cover groping and threats of the sack for sexual favours.

Anti

If you want women to acknowledge that some current expectations are unreasonable on blokes, you need to meet them half way. You seem too willing to use biology as a cop-out. Some of us have evolved quite a way from dogs.

Foxy

To repeat Houllie, "nobody is arguing about clear cut cases you keep mentioning." The behaviour that we are discussing is judged differently, depending on the particular woman, her mood at the time and how good looking the bloke is. The cases that you discuss are unacceptable, no matter how cute the guy is.