'Very few people get sacked because of "mere allegations"'

Appalling naivety or weasel words? Sexual harassment is weaponised and quite deliberately. Political correctness ensures that the mere suggestion, a whiff, of SH and character, career, job and marriage are threatened. The stain is never removed.

"Male-bashing, heterosexual-bashing, has become a characteristic within much of contemporary feminism. And sexual harassment laws have become the main political vehicle for the expression of heterosexual-bashing.

Lin Farley's pioneering work on sexual harassment, Sexual Shakedown: The Sexual Harassment of Women on the Job, appeared in 1978. Within its pages, she chronicled appalling and blatant instances of gender discrimination. She also acknowledged the self-conscious manner in which some women used sex in order to advance themselves in the workplace. From this starting point, militant feminists argued that women should be included in the protection offered by Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which prohibited discrimination on the basis of secondary characteristics such as race. This legislation, in conjunction with Title IX of the Education Amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act (1972), prohibited "verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, imposed on the basis of sex, by an employee or agent of a recipient of federal funds..."(p.18)

That was the view of sexual harassment in the '70s. In the '90s, the issue has evolved to the totalitarian point that a 6 year-old boy in North Carolina was recently suspended from his first-grade classroom for kissing a female co-student on the cheek. Patai considers such extremes to be the result of "the construction of a social problem on a national scale." She eloquently presents the dangers and destructive power of legally denying heterosexuality. Such an attempt not only flies in the face of biology, but threatens the underlying legal fabric upon which individual rights rest."

contd..

continued,

"Consider one example: in the university system (and many would argue in the legal system as well), when a charge of sexual harassment is leveled, the burden of proof is shifted to the accused. The accused is guilty until proven innocent. Sometimes the accusations are based on nothing more than politely questioning a feminist position. In one case, a markedly over-weight professor responded to a taunt shouted-out in class by a student who commented on the extreme 'size' of his chest: he observed that she had no such problem. As a result of the witch hunt that followed, the professor committed suicide. The university's main concern seemed to be that his death would discourage other similarly abused women from "speaking out."

Heterophobia has the refreshing charm of realizing that such incidents mean we are already living in a dystopian future gone mad. To the movement's shame, it is a feminist world. To the movement's credit, there are voice such as that of Patai's who are speaking sanity to the madness. And she speaks in feminist terms by unmasking the anti-woman assumptions of sexual harassment, e.g. women are not able to compete successfully with men on an even playing field: we are so weak and emotionally fragile as to require government protection in our social and professional interactions.

Heterophobia is a well-reasoned and well-structured book that is a pleasure to read. It is broken into three sections: The Making of a Social Problem; Typifying Tales; and, The Feminist Turn Against Men. My favorite is 'Typifying Tales' because, there, Patai gives voice to the unstated side of sexual harassment. Namely, the horrifying human toll it has taken on those who have been accused, including female professors such as author Valerie Jenness.

*Patai begins and ends with a haunting question: will current sexual harassment theory and policy create a better or worse society? Her answer is clear. Current sexual harassment policies create only conflict and dysfunction. Her answer is also convincing."
http://www.wendymcelroy.com/articles/heterophobia.html

*Professor Daphne Patai, UMass Amherst
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daphne_Patai

//Very few people get sacked because of "mere allegations".//

Perhaps. I've never seen any statistics, so it is hard for me to comment on frequency. But I know it does happen, because it has happened to me.

//Especially when it involves high powerful people who
bring in mega bucks for the organisation.//

Yeah, I wasn't one of those people. I was an apprentice chef, in a run-of-mill pub kitchen.

//Take the cases
of Eddie Mcguire and Don Burke.//

Well we could do that, but neither of us really know that much about the facts of those cases. Whereas I am extremely familiar with the facts of Toni Lavis' case.

As I said, I was an apprentice chef in a pub kitchen. I took a fancy to one of the waitresses and asked her out. At work. She said no.

Now, to my way of thinking that should have been the end of the story. Boy meets girl, boy likes girl, girl doesn't like boy that way, boy asks, girl says no, boy feels dissapointed but gets over it. An ancient tale, older than history itself, and one that will surely repeat itself long into the future.

But the story did not end there. She took exception to the fact that I asked her out in the workplace, and reported me for sexual harassment to the hotel manager, who fired me post haste. There was no investigation, I was denied natural justice and not given a chance to present my side of the argument

Being older and wiser, I recognise that the workplace may not be the best place to ask women out. But it should be noted that as an apprentice, I held no power or authority. When somebody in a position of power asks out a colleague, then that puts a different spin on things: the person further down the pecking order might feel pressured to say yes for the sake of their career. But that was not the case here.

Apprentices, under NSW labour laws, are not protected by unfair dismissal legislation. I sought advice from my union, and from the NSW State Training Authority, but I really didn't have any options. In my case, the allegation was sufficient grounds for sacking.

I realise that this is a fairly specific case: most people aren't apprentices, and thus operate under different rules. And I reckon most women wouldn't be offended by a fella asking them out even if they weren't interested, they'd just politely decline and leave it at that. And I know it's just one anecdote, and more data is required to establish a trend.

But it isn't a fiction. And it hasn't put me off feminism.

Dear Toni,

I am so sorry to hear that you were treated so unfairly.
Of course each case is different and we should allow
for individual differences. And you're right. Most
females that I know would have simply said no if they
weren't interested and left it at that.

Dear Toni,

Women are being murdered/abused every week.
There are plenty of examples on the web
about sexual harassment cases in the workplace.
One famous one that comes to mind was the
case where the CEO for David Jones was sued
by a former female employee who claimed that
the company turned a blind eye to this man's
behaviour. The case was finally settled out of
court. We now have Don Burke and the alegations
against him are piling up. Again, there's plenty
of information on the web about this matter,
with quite a few women coming forward now.

What does seem incredible as Sandra Sully points
out in her article in the Sydney Morning Herald
last year is the fact that EVERY story written
about violence (or sexual abuse) against women
brings out cue's like - "Feminist propaganda",
"Leftist, social engineering", "what about men",
"she deserved it because she was drunk/flirting/..."
"She needs to toughen up if she wants to play with
the boys". And the list goes on.

Perhaps, if enough women do stand up and speak out
then things might change. For us all. After all
abuse of any kind is not fair to any of us - male or
female. And, we need to join forces to stop it.
Because it hurts us all. But we need male support in
order to change anything.