Harvey Weinstein

[s_stabeler]

um, I have to disagree with you quite strongly there, Greenday. The allegation is "a fleeting hand agianst my knee"- I'm not sure of the heights involved, but if it's literally fleeting contact, I'd be inclined to think "brushed past"- which, while often rude, isn't a sexual advance in the slightest.

The problem is, frankly, if you say "no unwanted contact period"you're going to both get a lot of people punished when they literally had done nothing wrong (I'm talking about literal accidental contact here) as well as trivialising sexual harassment. There's a reason for the saying "might as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb"- if you are too harsh in what constitutes sexual harassment, people will decide they may as well actually harass someone, since they aren't going to get punished any worse.

[Greenday]

It was intentional contact and it was unwanted. Every HR policy would consider that sexual harassment. Even US federal government guidelines would says so. Putting your hand on someone's knee is intimate. Even if it's a brush.

[Talon]

Maybe if prostitution were legal, things might be different.

I highly doubt that.
For the predators of the world, sex is an afterthought. What they really want is to humiliate and dominate their victims. I don't see how legally-purchased sex would change that.

[protege]

What they really want is to humiliate and dominate their victims. I don't see how legally-purchased sex would change that.

I have a feeling that if it was legal, nothing would change. For those assholes, like you said, it's not about sex. It's about control. No, what I think would happen, is they'd throw out the same attitude you get in stores. That is, "I'm paying your salary, do my bidding..."

[Canarr]

It was intentional contact and it was unwanted.

And how, pray tell, do you know that? So far, Green has denied ever doing that, much less doing it intentionally.

It is absolutely sexual harassment. It's an unwanted sexual advance. That's an inappropriate thing to do to someone at work and the kind of thing that leads to much worse if left unchecked. Because it really IS a slippery slope. If you can get away with a hand on someone's knee, what else can you get away with? A hand on the thigh? Arm around the waist? Hugging someone closely from behind?

No unwanted contact, period. No one should have to deal with that.

Okay, seriously: do people in the US not flirt with their coworkers? Do people there not fall in love (or maybe just in lust) with each other, and act on that? Yes, you don't slap your hand on your coworker's knee during a meeting and say, "So, how's about we two meet in the supply closet at lunchtime?", while suggestively waggling your eyebrows.

But touching is a common step in the progression of flirting with each other. It is a non-verbal expression of interest in the other person. And it is not, per se, a bad thing - nor is it immediately harassment.

The definition of "to harass" in the online dictionary is:

to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.

The bolding is mine. What this means: you're harassing someone if you keep going on after they've told you no. Asking a coworker out the first time is not harassment, but if they express their disinterest, and you still ask again, then it is, yes.

The same goes for touching - although you generally need a higher degree of familiarity with the other person before you proceed to physical contact, of course. But the first time you try to escalate the relationship with another person to a higher level is not necessarily harassment, and should not be treated as such.

And no, that does not mean that people are "getting away" with anything, nor will touching someone while flirting necessarily be a slippery slope to harassment. It's not the same, and the former is not some sort of gateway crime leading to the latter.

[Greenday]

And how, pray tell, do you know that? So far, Green has denied ever doing that, much less doing it intentionally.

Okay, seriously: do people in the US not flirt with their coworkers? Do people there not fall in love (or maybe just in lust) with each other, and act on that? Yes, you don't slap your hand on your coworker's knee during a meeting and say, "So, how's about we two meet in the supply closet at lunchtime?", while suggestively waggling your eyebrows.

But touching is a common step in the progression of flirting with each other. It is a non-verbal expression of interest in the other person. And it is not, per se, a bad thing - nor is it immediately harassment.

The definition of "to harass" in the online dictionary is:

to disturb persistently; torment, as with troubles or cares; bother continually; pester; persecute.

The bolding is mine. What this means: you're harassing someone if you keep going on after they've told you no. Asking a coworker out the first time is not harassment, but if they express their disinterest, and you still ask again, then it is, yes.

The same goes for touching - although you generally need a higher degree of familiarity with the other person before you proceed to physical contact, of course. But the first time you try to escalate the relationship with another person to a higher level is not necessarily harassment, and should not be treated as such.

And no, that does not mean that people are "getting away" with anything, nor will touching someone while flirting necessarily be a slippery slope to harassment. It's not the same, and the former is not some sort of gateway crime leading to the latter.

Based off her comments, it's the definition of harassment.

People in the US flirt with co-workers all the time. It's all about knowing your audience though and if you don't know your co-worker is okay with you physically touching them, you don't physically touch them.

In America, legally just one time is enough for it to be harassment. If you have to guess whether it's okay to touch your co-worker, you just don't do it.

[Canarr]

Based off her comments, it's the definition of harassment.

That's not what I read from her comments. Could you elaborate on that, please?

People in the US flirt with co-workers all the time. It's all about knowing your audience though and if you don't know your co-worker is okay with you physically touching them, you don't physically touch them.

And how would you know that? Do you ask?

In America, legally just one time is enough for it to be harassment.

I checked yourEEOC, and it appears you're right.

It is unlawful to harass a person (an applicant or employee) because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include “sexual harassment” or unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature.

Harassment does not have to be of a sexual nature, however, and can include offensive remarks about a person’s sex. For example, it is illegal to harass a woman by making offensive comments about women in general.

Both victim and the harasser can be either a woman or a man, and the victim and harasser can be the same sex.

Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).

The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, a supervisor in another area, a co-worker, or someone who is not an employee of the employer, such as a client or customer.

Emphasis is mine, again. So, the law doesn't make a difference between non-harassing and harassing behavior, just between legal and illegal harassment. That seems seriously stupid.

German law operates on the premise that for any illegal act, there must be some kind of objective standard by which you can know in advance whether or not you are about to break the law. Like, tapping someone's shoulder to get their attention is fine, tapping someone's genitals generally isn't.

However, if "unwanted" is basically the only thing that decides whether or not an act is harassment, then how, exactly, is someone supposed to know whether or not they are about to harass someone? When the mere fact that your attention is unwanted turns asking a coworker out from flirting to harassment?

[TheHuckster]

Based off her comments, it's the definition of harassment.

"A fleeting touch of the knee" is not harassment. Hell, that could even mean accidental touching. If such accusations could be made based off of that, I'll never enter a crowded elevator and will have to buy first class airfare whereever I go.

Later, he asked her out. That, too, is not harassment. If he did it over and over again, or reacted negatively to her rejection, then that should be investigated. But merely asking someone out should never be considered harassment.