Sexual harassment isn’t just about men. Women should review their behavior too, says this female CEO

Article here. Excerpt:

'This routine of introspection is not limited to the guilty but also includes the innocent. It should also include women. Although none have yet been named as sexual predators, and a Google search fails to turn up a single recent case of a woman as aggressor, unwanted advances are not a single gender monopoly. Also, just because a women executive may have been a victim of sexual harassment herself, as I and most of my friends were when we were younger, does not mean that she is exempt from inflicting similar pain on others.

This thought and the pervasiveness of these incidents have led me to contemplate what I, as a female CEO, can learn from these publicized incidents. The lessons are broader than recognizing that sexual harassment is widespread and should not be tolerated in any form at my or any company. I need to replay the history of my own behavior to ensure that I have never mistreated any male in my employ, never inadvertently acted inappropriately, and make sure that I fully understand what this type of misbehavior looks like.
...
If misuse of power is the dominant enabling force in sexual misconduct, anyone at a high level within an organization might cause harm, unintentionally, to a subordinate. The risks of ignoring this subject can be very painful in human terms, expensive to your business, extremely disruptive, and wildly time consuming. Insurance premiums, for policies that cover legal cases or settlements, are, unsurprisingly, skyrocketing.

Women in executive positions should not think of themselves as immune to bad behavior or less likely to face serious charges and repercussions if they act inappropriately. Because many of us have been the victims, we should be leaders in solving this workplace problem, both by standing up to our abusers and by setting examples for model behavior as corporate leaders.'

up
68 users have voted.
I like this

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I heard of a...

... Japanese company that got rid of all its workers and replaced them with computers. It sold insurance policies. It employed 30 ppl. The men who founded it asked themselves if it was possible to replace everyone in the company with AI and it turned out that they could. Within two years the two of them remained the only employees.

While rampant automation and computerization continues to eliminate jobs merely due to profit motive, another compelling reason includes eliminating lawsuit risk from employees by eliminating as many as possible. As if maximizing profits weren't motive enough.

To start, employers may want to cut back on hiring women. They seem to be the most likely to sue. Next, while female CEOs may not generally rake in as much cash for any given company as male ones, companies are prob better off with female CEOs anyway as they get sued a lot less.

Finally, avoid hiring ppl in general but when you do, stick to men.

The future: companies with 3 employees, all men, that produce the same amt. of product as 200, 2000, and 20,000 ppl. Companies that employ ppl but they're all run by women and in any case to stay competitive they eventually have to eliminate their employees, 90% of whom will be men.

At this rate, by 2100, 60% of the pop'n will be on Guaranteed Minimum Income payments w/ the more entrepreneurial finding ways to make extra via drug-dealing, loan sharking, prostitution, fencing stolen goods, etc. 20% will live in gated communities patrolled by armed guards. 10% will be gov't workers, guards, personal servants, etc.

Men will fuck androids, by and large. Some %age will still fuck human women: hookers, etc. Possibly the Amish will be the only ppl left h@ving sex w/ other humans. Women prob will also fuck androids but I dunno. By then I hope Femina will be established anyway so it won't matter either way for the residents thereof.

I'll probably make it to 2050, maybe 2045 or 2040. 2050 if I can hang in there. I figure 2040-50 will be a good time to punch out.

up
3 users have voted.
I like this

Sexual Harassment

It seems to be a matter of power differential --no matter the gender of the exploiter.

Schoolteachers for example
Here's a list of 70 female teachers who "had sex with" also known as raped, their male students. Is there a #metoo for those guys?

http://www.wnd.com/2006/11/38932/

up
4 users have voted.
I like this