|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Davidadelong on 07:31 PM January 26th, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
I went to college as an older Male, 35 yrs old. I started in late 1989, finished early 1994. The young Women that received comments were dressed to get attention for the most part. Revealing clothes, heavy make up, skin tight jeans or spandex tights. Braless with large breasts bouncing around. I was married, didn't fool around, could have. Now those same Women have the right to dress to gain attention. But, if they receive attention because of the way they dress it is their own fault. I didn't pay much attention to how the young Men were dressed, so I honestly can't comment about that as I didn't care. But, I find it condradictory that a Woman will dress to catch the attention of one Guy, or one Gal, and when others notice it is their fault? I guess part of higher education should be a lesson in growing up as well, don't ya think? Just my opinion Folks........
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 08:10 PM January 26th, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Quote from the article ---
"Men are more likely to harass than women, but women and men are equally likely to be harassed on U.S. campuses, according to a report by the American Association of University Women."
Help me figure this out!
The statement above means either:
1) Fewer women than men are harassers, but the women harassers are very active and any individual female "perp" excels at harassment compared to the equivalent male perp.
2) Some male harassment is male-on-male harassment.
3) Lesbian professors are very discrete when they harass their female students.
--------
"The primary form of harassment that we’re seeing is actually non-contact: it tends to be remarks, gestures and jokes..."
In other words, the last place you would expect to find freedom of speech is on a college campus! Harassment has been defined through the radical feminist lens of "subjective discomfort."
Believe it or not, many colleges and universities have adopted Speech Codes that make it a violation of school policies to state anything that "might make another student feel uncomfortable!"
(Possible example ---
Black male student: "I am offended that some of my white male friends here on campus had great, great grandfathers who owned my great, great grandfathers as slaves."
White male student: "Bro' that's so embarassing and it makes me uncomfortable to hear you diss my great great grand-dads! And here at Howard University, you should be more sensitive to the white boyz' burden!")
--------
(See FIRE’s website for exhaustive documentation on campus speech codes at –
http://www.thefire.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by AngryMan
(end_misandryNOSPAM@yahoo.co.uk)
on 04:02 AM January 27th, 2006 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
It's depressing, but not entirely surprising, to see that the sexual harassment industry is still alive and well on US campuses.
It says something about the state of Western popular culture that such a ridiculous headline 'Nearly 2/3 of college students suffer sexual harassment', can be published in an ostensibly reputable media outlet, and people will believe it. It is plainly absurd.
If you concentrate thousands of young single adults together in one place you are going to see sexual behaviour happening. This is perfectly normal and healthy.
However the academic Left (feminists and the political correctness lobby) define this behaviour as aberrant in order to pursue their own political agenda.
This lobby invents its own definitions of terms like 'sexual harassment', and then invents a lot of questionable 'evidence' to support its claims.
This is part of an attempt to (i) control and limit sexuality generally (ii) to undermine heterosexuality in particular (iii)to undermine, criminalise and marginalise men in particular (iv) to attract more moral authority, power and funding for the feminist lobby.
To understand more about how this works read Daphne Patai's book 'Heterophobia'.
The trouble with young adults on campus is that they are politically very naive. They do not realise that they are the guinea pigs of a self-serving politically lobby. The fact that the feminist lobby is attempting to criminalise and pathologise their sexuality is itself abusive towards these young adults.
It is based partly on the mistaken assumption that young people are desperately fragile and need to be protected, therapised and reformed by a group of self-appointed moral guardians. See Christina Hoff Sommers' excellent new book 'One Nation Under Therapy'.
This campus lobby needs to be vigorously opposed.
"Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants." Louis D Brandeis, Supreme Court Justice, 1913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by MAUS on 07:04 PM January 28th, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
As a trade unionist, one of my proudest boasts is that I was among the first in Canada who got no harrassment for sexual orientation and no sexual harassment clauses in the contracts I negotiated.
Back then (the 1970's) however, sexual harassment was seen as quid pro quo/jus prima nocta/ fuck-suck or get fired, serious issue stuff.
I live in an old Selkirk Settler era farmhouse that the last tennant before me sold off all but two acres of the original full section grant to support his alcholism. I am lucky,though, the farmer who has the fields behind and to the north of me is a good neighbour.
He and his wife have a simple and easy to understand sexual harassment policy for their field hands...."you are a big boy/you are a big girl....fend for yourself"
They have, depending on the crop, between twelve and twenty field hands, just about equally male and female at any point during the summer. The back and forth banter in that field is just hillarious to listen to. The girls...especially the Newfoundlanders, certainly can give as good as they get and seem to be more content with this arrangement than they would be with any grievance procedure.
After having a good chuckle hearing this...I then have to get in my car and drive to a government office where everyone is as delicate as the dust on a butterfly's wing....what is wrong with this picture?
Baiting a chain tethered bear is harassment...plain,pure,and simple. If the bear is free range that is another matter.
The two most clearly understood words in the English language are "fuck off".
You never have to repeat yourself...you never have to expand on what it was you meant....you never have to explain what it was that prompted you to say it.
Most "sexual harassment " policies recommend that as a first measure you should speak to the harasser and tell them how you feel about their behaviour......are you catching my drift?
I generally follow this up with the challange "and you can complain about the fact that I said that to any authority figure you wish up to and including Jehovah"
Although I have done exactly what I have just described on numerous occassions....nobody ever does take it higher because that would saddle them with the inconvenience of defending the indefenceable.
GET OFF THE VICTIM TRIP...IT IS BULLSHIT...STOP WHINING "TEEECHER MAKE HIM STAAAAAAWPIT"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
