Tuesday, May 10, 2016

"The corporate ‘cure’ for sexual harassment only feeds the disease"

NY Post:  The last time you had to sit through a training program, you probably thought you were just wasting your time. You were wrong: Research suggests that efforts to raise awareness and train employees about sexual harassment may be worse than a waste. They may actually lead to more tolerance for sexual harassment, as well as greater reliance on stereotypes and more animosity between the sexes.
A research team at Stanford, for example, used an experiment in which one group of men heard a sexual-harassment policy before conducting a task with an unseen female partner.
The researchers found, compared to a control group, these men were more likely to believe “most people think both men and women are lower status, less competent, and less considerate,” and personally thought “everybody was lower in status.”
Another study of participants in a sexual-harassment training seminar found “male participants were less likely than other groups to perceive coercive sexual harassment, less willing to report sexual harassment, and more likely to blame the victim.”
So much for sensitivity training. These findings seem pretty obvious. Few people forced to read legalese or watch stilted programming about Johnny and Jane learning appropriate office behavior feel affirmed and inspired to be more respectful to others.
Rather, such programs tend to remind us of everything that’s wrong with our culture, with people assuming the worst of each other and forcing everyone to walk on eggshells lest they offend someone else. (read the whole thing)

11 comments:

edutcher said...

Actually, the fact this is driven by men-hating women who can't wait to sue everybody within gunshot also has something to do with it, as does the fact it's a bunch of Lefty judges, appointed by Lefty politicians, working in collusion with Lefty SJW lawyers isn't very conducive to real behavior modification since said behavior is wired in our DNA.

Was that sexist?

oopsy daisy said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dust Bunny Queen said...

I used to HATE these things when we had our broker dealer conferences. We all got together and went over sales, product and the inevitable "diversity" and "harassment" seminars.

In a crowd of about 150 men there were we few women. Probably about 10 of us. We had to sit through this bullshit while the men were rolling their eyes and looking at us like we were the ones who insisted on this crap. After the meetings we would all go out for drinks and us ladies would assure the guys that we were just as annoyed and offended as they were. Sorry bub. Let's just have another drink M'kay?

Talk about creating ill feelings. The couple of black guys in the crowd and some of the few asian brokers felt the same about the diversity portion as well. We, women and minorities all felt like tokens and hated the focus being turned on us.

Just go over the product, the salemanship, the craft.... shut up......and leave us the EFF alone.

edutcher said...

That's the idea though.

Everybody hates everybody and nobody can get anything done because they can't trust anybody else because the Lefties jam this nonsense down our throats.

ndspinelli said...

I worked some sexual harassment cases, defending men and their companies in lawsuits filed by women. One of the cases involved a time share condo company. You can look long and hard trying to find slimier people than time share sales people. Here are the facts presented by the plaintiff, which I verified to be true. A group of ~8 salespeople had a meeting in a conference room. As the meeting was ending someone suggested they send out for lunch. This was a group of salesmen and one saleswoman. Several people chimed in w/ suggestions when the sales manager, a more despicable guy you'll never find, whipped out his cock, placed it on the conference table in front of the woman and said, "How about this, honey." The case settled.

Synova said...

What do you do when your client is a slimeball? As a lawyer you owe them your representation to the best of your ability. Do you tell them that they'll lose and they need to settle or they need a different lawyer?

ndspinelli said...

Synova, You definitely advise them to settle, and explain to them the downside of going to trial. Some attorneys would withdraw if the client rejects the sound advice, but most would try the case if the slimeball won't take the good advice. I have no problem w/ an attorney taking the slimeball's case to trial, as long as they did all they could to try and settle the case.

Amartel said...

There really are some crazies out there who wreck it for everyone else in their respective identity groups, become the poster child for this, that, or the other ism. Nasty men, toxic womyn, vindictive gays, resentful racists, etc. I've always wondered how much the crazy person's particular phobia is inherent (some hatred that was born in them or caused by the environment which nurtured them) or was suggested to them by the media/grievance industry. I am trending in favor of the latter as a general rule. It's like a "how to" manual for nuts.

rhhardin said...

My experience is that if you say what you think at the meeting, they don't invite you next year to the mandatory consciousness raising seminar.

ndspinelli said...

"toxic womyn." LOL! I think some are born bad, victim mentality, etc. and the litigious culture "nurtures" those who are maybe on the fence, to feel entitled. I've been working in this biz long enough that I remember when attorneys couldn't advertise. Allowing attorneys to advertise turned personal injury into an industry.

Chip Ahoy said...

Wow, ndspinelli, what a pig.