This IS sexual harassment
August 16, 2011 7:23 PM Subscribe
Please help me educate an employee on how his "friendly" remarks sound to women.
A female vendor has complained about inappropriate comments from one of the people I supervise. I've reviewed her report, and the comments are inappropriate, although I can see why it wouldn't seem so from a man's perspective. He's been told how to correct the behavior, but he truly doesn't understand why his comments were not mere friendliness.
I think he's willing to learn, but I don't know what to give him that would address the situation and explain how this behavior appears to women. I'd like to give him something like the Schrodinger's Rapist thread, but that's not really appropriate for me to do as his supervisor. Do you know of any resources that don't just say "Don't do this," but explain why these comments can come across as threatening to women?
(The matter is being handled by the institution's HR department and the final decision is out of my hands. I'm just looking for something that will help him understand this for future interactions)
A female vendor has complained about inappropriate comments from one of the people I supervise. I've reviewed her report, and the comments are inappropriate, although I can see why it wouldn't seem so from a man's perspective. He's been told how to correct the behavior, but he truly doesn't understand why his comments were not mere friendliness.
I think he's willing to learn, but I don't know what to give him that would address the situation and explain how this behavior appears to women. I'd like to give him something like the Schrodinger's Rapist thread, but that's not really appropriate for me to do as his supervisor. Do you know of any resources that don't just say "Don't do this," but explain why these comments can come across as threatening to women?
(The matter is being handled by the institution's HR department and the final decision is out of my hands. I'm just looking for something that will help him understand this for future interactions)
I'm not sure about resources, but I think it might help if you were to give some examples of these remarks? It might help others to identify appropriate resources if they are more aware of the tone and content of what your supervisor is saying.
posted by andrewesque at 7:25 PM on August 16, 2011
posted by andrewesque at 7:25 PM on August 16, 2011
He's been told how to correct the behavior, but he truly doesn't understand why his comments were not mere friendliness.
I don't understand: if he knows what he's supposed to do differently, is it really true that he doesn't understand what was inappropriate about what he said before? Is it clear that there is a problem here? He might not entirely agree that what he said before was wrong, but as long as he now knows what the proper standards are and is able to follow them, why isn't that sufficient? It might not be morally sufficient for him to be a good human being, but that doesn't really concern the company.
And as others have said, the more specific you can be about what kinds of things he's saying, the better. It's hard to know what to do about an abstract problem. You can give us this information through the "contact" link in the lower right hand corner.
Sending him an extremely long and traumatic Metafilter thread about rape and assault would not be a good idea. It might be more useful to get him to watch an episode of The Office. But again, I don't really know since I don't know what he said.
posted by John Cohen at 7:31 PM on August 16, 2011 [5 favorites]
I don't understand: if he knows what he's supposed to do differently, is it really true that he doesn't understand what was inappropriate about what he said before? Is it clear that there is a problem here? He might not entirely agree that what he said before was wrong, but as long as he now knows what the proper standards are and is able to follow them, why isn't that sufficient? It might not be morally sufficient for him to be a good human being, but that doesn't really concern the company.
And as others have said, the more specific you can be about what kinds of things he's saying, the better. It's hard to know what to do about an abstract problem. You can give us this information through the "contact" link in the lower right hand corner.
Sending him an extremely long and traumatic Metafilter thread about rape and assault would not be a good idea. It might be more useful to get him to watch an episode of The Office. But again, I don't really know since I don't know what he said.
posted by John Cohen at 7:31 PM on August 16, 2011 [5 favorites]
Suggest he ask his female friends or wife?
posted by salvia at 7:34 PM on August 16, 2011 [2 favorites]
posted by salvia at 7:34 PM on August 16, 2011 [2 favorites]
This wouldn't work with everybody, and it really depends on the kind of remarks he's making, but assuming he's straight and that the comments are suggestive/intrusive/insinuating in some way: Ask him to think about how he'd feel if a gay man made the same kind of remarks to him?
posted by Gator at 7:39 PM on August 16, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by Gator at 7:39 PM on August 16, 2011 [1 favorite]
Let me revise. You might suggest he ask his close female friends, sister, mother, cousin, or wife WHY hearing those statements would be uncomfortable for SOME people? The question is not whether those statements are wrong or not. Knowing that some people find them inoffensive would be irrelevant and not prove his point. The question is "some people DO find these uncomfortable. Why might they feel that way? I am having a hard time understanding but would really like to understand."
posted by salvia at 7:41 PM on August 16, 2011
posted by salvia at 7:41 PM on August 16, 2011
He doesn't have to read a metafilter comment thread on Schroedinger's Rapist. You could just send him a link to the article itself. It's really a pretty gentle introduction to understanding how differently men and women can see their environment, and it seems to have clicked with a lot of people. I can't imagine it'd hurt, at any rate.
Another good source for feminism/sexual harassment 101 material is the Geek Feminism wiki. It's got a lot of information on gender dynamics in the workplace and other professional settings. Without knowing exactly what type of thing he's been saying, I can't recommend anything directly on point, but I'll guess that the concept of the grunch might be helpful for him to understand. And here's their index of common issues that women encounter in the workplace and elsewhere, some of which might help explain whatever it is that he's confused about.
posted by ernielundquist at 7:54 PM on August 16, 2011 [7 favorites]
Another good source for feminism/sexual harassment 101 material is the Geek Feminism wiki. It's got a lot of information on gender dynamics in the workplace and other professional settings. Without knowing exactly what type of thing he's been saying, I can't recommend anything directly on point, but I'll guess that the concept of the grunch might be helpful for him to understand. And here's their index of common issues that women encounter in the workplace and elsewhere, some of which might help explain whatever it is that he's confused about.
posted by ernielundquist at 7:54 PM on August 16, 2011 [7 favorites]
Unfortunately, you're probably not going to change his mindset overnight. If he doesn't think he did anything wrong, he's probably going to keep thinking that no matter what you say.
Same goes for sending him a link to anything on the internet. That Metafilter post got a strong reaction because it tapped into what people on this site already believe. When someone reads something that challenges their worldview, they tend to rationalize it away so that they don't need to bother adjusting their attitudes.
It may be nice to imagine that if he would only talk to a woman, she would suddenly make him see the light. Unfortunately, there's no assurance that any given woman he talked with would herself have good standards about what kinds of comments are appropriate at work. Not all women are paragons of tact, just like not all men are.
What you can do is give him a wakeup call that if he keeps making similar remarks, there may be tangible consequences for him at his job.
posted by John Cohen at 7:58 PM on August 16, 2011 [4 favorites]
Same goes for sending him a link to anything on the internet. That Metafilter post got a strong reaction because it tapped into what people on this site already believe. When someone reads something that challenges their worldview, they tend to rationalize it away so that they don't need to bother adjusting their attitudes.
It may be nice to imagine that if he would only talk to a woman, she would suddenly make him see the light. Unfortunately, there's no assurance that any given woman he talked with would herself have good standards about what kinds of comments are appropriate at work. Not all women are paragons of tact, just like not all men are.
What you can do is give him a wakeup call that if he keeps making similar remarks, there may be tangible consequences for him at his job.
posted by John Cohen at 7:58 PM on August 16, 2011 [4 favorites]
Here is a good definition that might stress to him that HIS intention of "friendliness" is irrelevant, once the other person takes those words differently.
From ERA [Equal Rights Advocates] website:
"The legal definition of sexual harassment is 'unwelcome verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is severe or pervasive and affects working conditions or creates a hostile work environment.'"
"Conduct is not sexual harassment if it is welcome..."
If your employee had made remarks about the vendor's religion or background that were offensive, how much "proof" would he request that said remarks were offensive? Wouldn't he just accept that his remarks were offensive and be able to prevent himself from using those statements, tone, or behavior in the future?
posted by calgirl at 8:20 PM on August 16, 2011
From ERA [Equal Rights Advocates] website:
"The legal definition of sexual harassment is 'unwelcome verbal, visual, or physical conduct of a sexual nature that is severe or pervasive and affects working conditions or creates a hostile work environment.'"
"Conduct is not sexual harassment if it is welcome..."
If your employee had made remarks about the vendor's religion or background that were offensive, how much "proof" would he request that said remarks were offensive? Wouldn't he just accept that his remarks were offensive and be able to prevent himself from using those statements, tone, or behavior in the future?
posted by calgirl at 8:20 PM on August 16, 2011
Not a "resource," exactly, but if you think he really is open to learning, you might get somewhere by recasting the situation. You don't say exactly how his remarks were "inappropriate," but I'm guessing they were situationally inappropriate: not patently offensive, but perhaps calling attention to the vendor's gender in a way that would be inappropriate for the work setting, or making her feel subtly put down into a subordinate position (as in the "smile" command). So you could try asking him whether he would say the exact same things to a male vendor, or to a person who was a few steps above him in the organizational hierarchy, or to a member of his family. If the answer in any of the above cases is "no," then you can ask him to pick apart why he wouldn't say the same things to the other person. The point is not that we should use the same language all the time with all persons, but that our choice of language carries some implicit messages and he needs to be more aware of what messages he's putting across.
posted by Orinda at 8:39 PM on August 16, 2011 [1 favorite]
posted by Orinda at 8:39 PM on August 16, 2011 [1 favorite]
Ask him if he would say the exact same thing to a male vendor.
posted by tracicle at 8:42 PM on August 16, 2011 [14 favorites]
posted by tracicle at 8:42 PM on August 16, 2011 [14 favorites]
Sorry to sound like an asshole, but I don't think you need to or should do this. It's his responsibility to conduct himself in an appropriate way at work. If you have shown him the HR policy and the law, well, he has google right?
What I I think he's actually doing is arguing with you or continuing to defend himself. Any resource could just become fodder for further argument or defensiveness (as seen on MeFi).
posted by crabintheocean at 8:44 PM on August 16, 2011 [3 favorites]
What I I think he's actually doing is arguing with you or continuing to defend himself. Any resource could just become fodder for further argument or defensiveness (as seen on MeFi).
posted by crabintheocean at 8:44 PM on August 16, 2011 [3 favorites]
The problem with trying to teach him how a particular behavior appears to women is that not all women respond to things the same way. Maybe another woman would've been flattered by whatever he said, and maybe he's actually said similar things to other women and none of them complained (though there's no way of knowing without knowing what was said). That's why it's more important for him to understand the policy, to really get that through his head, rather than trying to get him to understand how any woman might interpret something he says.
Also, there's a difference between a woman feeling threatened by something a man says (the Schrodinger's Rapist situation), and a woman feeling demeaned by a male colleague who seems to pay more attention to her being a woman than her ability to do her job.
posted by wondermouse at 9:12 PM on August 16, 2011
Also, there's a difference between a woman feeling threatened by something a man says (the Schrodinger's Rapist situation), and a woman feeling demeaned by a male colleague who seems to pay more attention to her being a woman than her ability to do her job.
posted by wondermouse at 9:12 PM on August 16, 2011
I'm not sure how much you can or should be involved in it given that it's going through HR.
Behavioral change really only occurs when something is at stake and I don't think you're in a position to reinforce that with him, but HR is.
posted by mleigh at 9:26 PM on August 16, 2011
Behavioral change really only occurs when something is at stake and I don't think you're in a position to reinforce that with him, but HR is.
posted by mleigh at 9:26 PM on August 16, 2011
I don't think there's really any harm in giving the guy the benefit of the doubt and assuming he's sincere in wanting to understand not just what the rules are, but how differently some women might interpret 'compliments' that he would personally welcome.
Most men don't really understand how differently a situation can come across from a woman's perspective. Of course, as others have wisely pointed out, all women interpret things differently; but there are some broad strokes you can make based on generalizations such as women usually being physically smaller than men and far more likely to experience sexual violence or even just marginalizing attitudes. These differences are addressed pretty eloquently in the Schroedinger's Rapist article, which is why I think that's a really good place for him to start.
Absolutely, there's no need to continue with him if he responds by deflecting the arguments or pontificating on how he thinks women should respond or anything like that. But if you have the opportunity, and he really seems sincere in wanting to understand these issues in good faith, pointing him in the right direction would be a real public service, for him and for any women he works with in the future.
posted by ernielundquist at 9:51 PM on August 16, 2011
Most men don't really understand how differently a situation can come across from a woman's perspective. Of course, as others have wisely pointed out, all women interpret things differently; but there are some broad strokes you can make based on generalizations such as women usually being physically smaller than men and far more likely to experience sexual violence or even just marginalizing attitudes. These differences are addressed pretty eloquently in the Schroedinger's Rapist article, which is why I think that's a really good place for him to start.
Absolutely, there's no need to continue with him if he responds by deflecting the arguments or pontificating on how he thinks women should respond or anything like that. But if you have the opportunity, and he really seems sincere in wanting to understand these issues in good faith, pointing him in the right direction would be a real public service, for him and for any women he works with in the future.
posted by ernielundquist at 9:51 PM on August 16, 2011
After reading this, and the many good answers, a couple of lines from this recent article came to mind, and what I've bolded is as much as I'd say:
(emphasis mine)
Street harassment is ultimately about entitlement -- it’s about a dude (usually a dude, though women are occasionally guilty of it too) who is emboldened by gendered power dynamics into feeling as though your body is public property, and he has a right to comment on it, whether he thinks he’s paying you a “compliment” for which you ought to be grateful, or trying to tear you down for not being attractive according to his exacting specifications.
The intention behind the commentary doesn’t really matter because public harassment by a stranger isn’t about making you feel good. It’s about putting you in your place, and reminding you that as a woman, your social purpose is to look appealing to guys. Even strange creepy guys you’d rather ignored you altogether. And no, it doesn’t matter what you look like, what you’re wearing, whether you’re alone or with a group, public harassment is never justifiable. You are never “asking for it,” and anybody who argues that position is kind of a jerk.
And, to end, as it was mentioned in the article, because of those gendered power dynamics, when it happens in a public place, especially a workplace, the woman's ability to react is compromised, putting her at even more of a disadvantage.
posted by peagood at 10:31 PM on August 16, 2011 [3 favorites]
(emphasis mine)
Street harassment is ultimately about entitlement -- it’s about a dude (usually a dude, though women are occasionally guilty of it too) who is emboldened by gendered power dynamics into feeling as though your body is public property, and he has a right to comment on it, whether he thinks he’s paying you a “compliment” for which you ought to be grateful, or trying to tear you down for not being attractive according to his exacting specifications.
The intention behind the commentary doesn’t really matter because public harassment by a stranger isn’t about making you feel good. It’s about putting you in your place, and reminding you that as a woman, your social purpose is to look appealing to guys. Even strange creepy guys you’d rather ignored you altogether. And no, it doesn’t matter what you look like, what you’re wearing, whether you’re alone or with a group, public harassment is never justifiable. You are never “asking for it,” and anybody who argues that position is kind of a jerk.
And, to end, as it was mentioned in the article, because of those gendered power dynamics, when it happens in a public place, especially a workplace, the woman's ability to react is compromised, putting her at even more of a disadvantage.
posted by peagood at 10:31 PM on August 16, 2011 [3 favorites]
Ask him if he would say the exact same thing to a male vendor.
This, this, this. I once had a manager who used an infantilizing diminutive in an email to me, and we went round in circles as to WHY it was inappropriate. It wasn't until I asked him if he would call [male colleague] that and he said "of course not!" and then stopped short and apologized. Never tried to use little-girl language at me again.
posted by L'Estrange Fruit at 12:21 AM on August 17, 2011 [8 favorites]
This, this, this. I once had a manager who used an infantilizing diminutive in an email to me, and we went round in circles as to WHY it was inappropriate. It wasn't until I asked him if he would call [male colleague] that and he said "of course not!" and then stopped short and apologized. Never tried to use little-girl language at me again.
posted by L'Estrange Fruit at 12:21 AM on August 17, 2011 [8 favorites]
You've already told him that a vendor (a vendor! the person in the one-down position below you!) has had a problem serious enough to complain about, and that her complaint is reasonable by the standards of your culture.
If he won't accept that, it's probably because he doesn't want to, and she's the vendor, therefore he is in the superior position so he thinks he doesn't have to. Could this be accurate, de facto if not de jure? I'd figure that out before you go any further.
posted by tel3path at 1:29 AM on August 17, 2011
If he won't accept that, it's probably because he doesn't want to, and she's the vendor, therefore he is in the superior position so he thinks he doesn't have to. Could this be accurate, de facto if not de jure? I'd figure that out before you go any further.
posted by tel3path at 1:29 AM on August 17, 2011
Sorry to sound like an asshole, but I don't think you need to or should do this. It's his responsibility to conduct himself in an appropriate way at work. If you have shown him the HR policy and the law, well, he has google right?
For every female professional that takes the time to actually inform the boss of the person who made them feel uncomfortable how inappropriate their remarks were, how many do you think just keep silent and make a mental note to use a different vendor the next time? Keep in mind that in a professional setting one has to be careful not to acquire a 'label' by the tone deaf middle/upper management who are completely unfamiliar with these concepts, so this act is not without risk. Just because there are no more complaints does not mean the problem has gone away, especially if he hasn't been made to understand the underlying reason why it was inappropriate in the first place. My point here is that these kinds of issues thrive and fester in the dark and this terrible attitude of, "well, he's been told to stop, and as long as nobody else complains we'll just assume he got the message" is exactly why. This could be silently costing the organization, in term of lost clients or in public opinion/reputation, but you'd never know it. He needs to understand the why behind the complaint because that is the only way it will be fixed -- a person who utterly fails to comprehend a complaint of harassment registered against them will simply brush it off as the other person being "too sensitive" or "too stuck up" or something equally vile, and assume it was a fluke.
posted by Rhomboid at 3:31 AM on August 17, 2011 [5 favorites]
For every female professional that takes the time to actually inform the boss of the person who made them feel uncomfortable how inappropriate their remarks were, how many do you think just keep silent and make a mental note to use a different vendor the next time? Keep in mind that in a professional setting one has to be careful not to acquire a 'label' by the tone deaf middle/upper management who are completely unfamiliar with these concepts, so this act is not without risk. Just because there are no more complaints does not mean the problem has gone away, especially if he hasn't been made to understand the underlying reason why it was inappropriate in the first place. My point here is that these kinds of issues thrive and fester in the dark and this terrible attitude of, "well, he's been told to stop, and as long as nobody else complains we'll just assume he got the message" is exactly why. This could be silently costing the organization, in term of lost clients or in public opinion/reputation, but you'd never know it. He needs to understand the why behind the complaint because that is the only way it will be fixed -- a person who utterly fails to comprehend a complaint of harassment registered against them will simply brush it off as the other person being "too sensitive" or "too stuck up" or something equally vile, and assume it was a fluke.
posted by Rhomboid at 3:31 AM on August 17, 2011 [5 favorites]
I'm guessing that there may be a culture or class gap here, and that the "friendly" comments were along the lines of complimenting clothes or appearance, or using terms of endearment? If that is he case, then you are going to have to give up educating this guy about why he is making women uncomfortable, because that's just too abstract. Instead, just tell him not to make any specific comments on clothes or appearance, and tell him to use names or titles only.
Also, there is no way to tell what is going on here, but it IS possible that his conduct is more innocuous than it might seem. It is not harassment to have a harmlessly flirtatious interaction every now and again in the workplace - I am pretty sure everyone does it. You need to figure out if this guy just went over the line in a way that is egregious, or if it's more a difference of opinion or a failure to read the situation correctly.
posted by yarly at 5:33 AM on August 17, 2011
Also, there is no way to tell what is going on here, but it IS possible that his conduct is more innocuous than it might seem. It is not harassment to have a harmlessly flirtatious interaction every now and again in the workplace - I am pretty sure everyone does it. You need to figure out if this guy just went over the line in a way that is egregious, or if it's more a difference of opinion or a failure to read the situation correctly.
posted by yarly at 5:33 AM on August 17, 2011
From a female professional perspective - I agree with crabintheocean and Rhomboid. I only see more trouble in your area if you try to "help" him. If you still want to "help" try Rhomboid's angle - someone who isn't an employee had the urge to speak up.
By the way - Rhomboid is correct. I have tolerated quite a bit over the years.
posted by BuffaloChickenWing at 6:58 AM on August 17, 2011
By the way - Rhomboid is correct. I have tolerated quite a bit over the years.
posted by BuffaloChickenWing at 6:58 AM on August 17, 2011
how many do you think just keep silent and make a mental note to use a different vendor the next time?
In this case, it was the vendor who complained, so in most cases it would be your company that would silently switch to a vendor that doesn't complain. That may be where this guy's resistance is coming from.
posted by tel3path at 6:58 AM on August 17, 2011
In this case, it was the vendor who complained, so in most cases it would be your company that would silently switch to a vendor that doesn't complain. That may be where this guy's resistance is coming from.
posted by tel3path at 6:58 AM on August 17, 2011
"Would you say it to a male colleague/business acquaintance?" is a really good rule-of-thumb... unless the guy's a big joker who says inappropriate stuff to his male colleagues all the time. In that case, you might try "Would you say it to your boss/pastor/policeman-who-pulled-you-over-for-speeding?" – something's gotta click. :)
Would he tell the patrolman he needs to smile more, or that he likes his hair that way, or that he looks great in blue, or that he's always happy to see his pretty face, or that he must have lost/gained weight? If the guy claims to remain confused about what is or isn't appropriate when viewing it in that context, he's just being passive aggressive about the issue.
* For people who might be getting their grar on about this advice, I don't think men need to treat women colleagues as if they were patrol cops (!), but if someone really just can't grasp what is inappropriate, it might be helpful rubric.
posted by taz at 7:11 AM on August 17, 2011
Would he tell the patrolman he needs to smile more, or that he likes his hair that way, or that he looks great in blue, or that he's always happy to see his pretty face, or that he must have lost/gained weight? If the guy claims to remain confused about what is or isn't appropriate when viewing it in that context, he's just being passive aggressive about the issue.
* For people who might be getting their grar on about this advice, I don't think men need to treat women colleagues as if they were patrol cops (!), but if someone really just can't grasp what is inappropriate, it might be helpful rubric.
posted by taz at 7:11 AM on August 17, 2011
Sorry to sound like an asshole, but I don't think you need to or should do this. It's his responsibility to conduct himself in an appropriate way at work.
The OP says the comments are coming from "one of the people I supervise". Since the OP is in a supervisory/management role, it's quite possible that failure to do something about it could open the company up to legal action. (It might not, and even if it does there no guarantee that it would be successful, but such claims are time-consuming and expensive to deal with whether they have merit or not.)
posted by Lexica at 11:44 AM on August 17, 2011
The OP says the comments are coming from "one of the people I supervise". Since the OP is in a supervisory/management role, it's quite possible that failure to do something about it could open the company up to legal action. (It might not, and even if it does there no guarantee that it would be successful, but such claims are time-consuming and expensive to deal with whether they have merit or not.)
posted by Lexica at 11:44 AM on August 17, 2011
OP posting from a sockpuppet account I had forgotten I could use...
The comments in question ranged from "You have beautiful eyes/hair" to "Damn, you look smokin' hot." He also asked her to come in his office and shut the door, then said "I haven't seen you in a while, give me a hug." I'm looking for information on why it's harassment in the workplace to "compliment" a woman's physical attributes, even if you mean it in a nice way. And for why asking a woman to come in your office, close the door, and allow him to invade her personal space can make a woman feel trapped and threatened, not admired or liked. He says he hugs the male vendors as well, so "would you do this to a man?" is not going to yield the expected response.
posted by corvus agitator at 12:11 PM on August 17, 2011
The comments in question ranged from "You have beautiful eyes/hair" to "Damn, you look smokin' hot." He also asked her to come in his office and shut the door, then said "I haven't seen you in a while, give me a hug." I'm looking for information on why it's harassment in the workplace to "compliment" a woman's physical attributes, even if you mean it in a nice way. And for why asking a woman to come in your office, close the door, and allow him to invade her personal space can make a woman feel trapped and threatened, not admired or liked. He says he hugs the male vendors as well, so "would you do this to a man?" is not going to yield the expected response.
posted by corvus agitator at 12:11 PM on August 17, 2011
Hi! I'm a woman and (generally, not right now) in a supervisory/managerial role too. Not sure if I'm a "professional" or exactly what that means. I have also been subject to and had to deal with plenty of harassment myself, so please spare me the lecture.
My point is not "well, he's been told to stop, and as long as nobody else complains we'll just assume he got the message". My real "terrible attitude" is actually that as a supervisor your job is to set boundaries and consistently enforce them, not to provide context, history, or justification for why those boundaries exist, and that it's especially dangerous for a woman in an authority position to get into a conversation about how women feel or experience interactions with men. It makes it much too easy for problem men who already perceive their interactions with women to be too negotiable and open to personal interpretation to continue to view sexual harassment as a personal thing rather than a matter of their employment. You risk every day becoming a back and forth about exact boundaries and limits, why not all women feel the same way etc (just like we get on Metafilter)
The understanding is great and ultimately essential, but it comes after, I believe it shouldn't come from a female supervisor, and I have never seen real understanding in any context without a real wish to understand, which from my own experience I'm dubious exists here. At work it's about behavior, not about understanding. I don't need to understand why I will be fired if I take a shit on my bosses desk.
So I advocate watching this employee like a hawk, I advocate making sure he's not alone and unsupervised around women until it's clear things are fixed, I advocate training for him and everyone else in the organization too (and sooner, so everyone knows the expectations and another vendor doesn't have to risk their business to get it fixed). Nowhere did I say that you should wash your hands of it and it will be fine. What I don't advocate is trying to help a employee who is crossing boundaries by trying going anywhere near your own job defined boundaries on how rules about behavior are enforced. I have dealt with too many men who think their problems are actually just the problems of the nearest woman in one way or another, so I really recommend being extra clear that it's entirely on him to fix his behavior to your, HRs, and everyone else's satisfaction.
Most of what John Cohen said too.
posted by crabintheocean at 1:16 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
My point is not "well, he's been told to stop, and as long as nobody else complains we'll just assume he got the message". My real "terrible attitude" is actually that as a supervisor your job is to set boundaries and consistently enforce them, not to provide context, history, or justification for why those boundaries exist, and that it's especially dangerous for a woman in an authority position to get into a conversation about how women feel or experience interactions with men. It makes it much too easy for problem men who already perceive their interactions with women to be too negotiable and open to personal interpretation to continue to view sexual harassment as a personal thing rather than a matter of their employment. You risk every day becoming a back and forth about exact boundaries and limits, why not all women feel the same way etc (just like we get on Metafilter)
The understanding is great and ultimately essential, but it comes after, I believe it shouldn't come from a female supervisor, and I have never seen real understanding in any context without a real wish to understand, which from my own experience I'm dubious exists here. At work it's about behavior, not about understanding. I don't need to understand why I will be fired if I take a shit on my bosses desk.
So I advocate watching this employee like a hawk, I advocate making sure he's not alone and unsupervised around women until it's clear things are fixed, I advocate training for him and everyone else in the organization too (and sooner, so everyone knows the expectations and another vendor doesn't have to risk their business to get it fixed). Nowhere did I say that you should wash your hands of it and it will be fine. What I don't advocate is trying to help a employee who is crossing boundaries by trying going anywhere near your own job defined boundaries on how rules about behavior are enforced. I have dealt with too many men who think their problems are actually just the problems of the nearest woman in one way or another, so I really recommend being extra clear that it's entirely on him to fix his behavior to your, HRs, and everyone else's satisfaction.
Most of what John Cohen said too.
posted by crabintheocean at 1:16 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
Does he treat all coworkers that way or just the vendors? It's not appropriate to demand a hug from someone, especially not behind a closed door. This guy shouldn't have any closed door meetings, from the sounds of it. Does he tell the male vendors they look hot?
posted by soelo at 1:34 PM on August 17, 2011
posted by soelo at 1:34 PM on August 17, 2011
Agreed with crabintheocean. Do not get sucked into a game whereby it's your job to explain the concept of sexual harassment to his satisfaction before he will agree to change his behaviour. He doesn't have to like it, he just has to do it. Don't let him come away from any discussion thinking that since you haven't persuaded him, you've therefore agreed to let him proceed according to his personal standards.
posted by tel3path at 1:39 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by tel3path at 1:39 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
And this is the pitfall of "does he tell the male vendors they look hot". If he superglued farm animals to the vendors both male and female, the supergluing of farm animals to personnel still wouldn't be OK, however egalitarian he was in the doing of it.
posted by tel3path at 1:41 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
posted by tel3path at 1:41 PM on August 17, 2011 [3 favorites]
He says he hugs the male vendors as well, so "would you do this to a man?" is not going to yield the expected response.
Based on the specifics you've shared about the comments, I reiterate my suggestion to ask him how he would react if a gay man made those remarks to him on a regular basis, including these "C'mere sweetie, close the door behind you, now gimme a hug" tricks. Not just any "bro" of a guy, but an out-and-proud gay man. "You have beautiful eeeeeeeeeyes." "Mmmmm, you look smokin' hot (lingering up-and-down eye-undressing)." Etc.
(Honestly, I agree with others who think that trying to explain the nuances of these issues or showing literature to a guy like this is a waste of time.)
posted by Gator at 3:16 PM on August 17, 2011
Based on the specifics you've shared about the comments, I reiterate my suggestion to ask him how he would react if a gay man made those remarks to him on a regular basis, including these "C'mere sweetie, close the door behind you, now gimme a hug" tricks. Not just any "bro" of a guy, but an out-and-proud gay man. "You have beautiful eeeeeeeeeyes." "Mmmmm, you look smokin' hot (lingering up-and-down eye-undressing)." Etc.
(Honestly, I agree with others who think that trying to explain the nuances of these issues or showing literature to a guy like this is a waste of time.)
posted by Gator at 3:16 PM on August 17, 2011
"ask him how he would react if a gay man made those remarks to him on a regular basis"
Not calling you homophobic, but I think raising this in a workplace is dangerously close to encouraging or indulging homophobia.
OP, I realized I all-but failed to answer your question in my last round of graar, and I had another, maybe more helpful thought. Have you seen the materials your HR department uses in anti-sexual harassment training? Do they have any, are they any good, could you push them to find something helpful and standard that could be used in trainings and shared with staff via supervisors like you? Everywhere I've worked that had their ducks semi in a row on harassment had some (usually fairly lack-luster) pamphlets and hand-outs covering different situations and why they were a problem, and when I could I've been part of suggesting upgrades and improvements to the materials we had on hand.
posted by crabintheocean at 3:29 PM on August 17, 2011
Not calling you homophobic, but I think raising this in a workplace is dangerously close to encouraging or indulging homophobia.
OP, I realized I all-but failed to answer your question in my last round of graar, and I had another, maybe more helpful thought. Have you seen the materials your HR department uses in anti-sexual harassment training? Do they have any, are they any good, could you push them to find something helpful and standard that could be used in trainings and shared with staff via supervisors like you? Everywhere I've worked that had their ducks semi in a row on harassment had some (usually fairly lack-luster) pamphlets and hand-outs covering different situations and why they were a problem, and when I could I've been part of suggesting upgrades and improvements to the materials we had on hand.
posted by crabintheocean at 3:29 PM on August 17, 2011
Yow. Based on your update, I take back what I said about giving him the benefit of the doubt. No reasonable person has any credible excuse for not understanding what's wrong with that. I was imagining the transgressions were maybe just inappropriate compliments about looking nice today, and maybe some relatively mild gendered comments or something. You know, the kind of thing that might genuinely be confusing for an adult human. He's just being disingenuous and trying to pull you into an argument or something.
If he still has his job, he doesn't need anything beyond a clear delineation of the rules, and probably, based on his lack of understanding, close supervision.
posted by ernielundquist at 4:20 PM on August 17, 2011
If he still has his job, he doesn't need anything beyond a clear delineation of the rules, and probably, based on his lack of understanding, close supervision.
posted by ernielundquist at 4:20 PM on August 17, 2011
The comments in question ranged from "You have beautiful eyes/hair" to "Damn, you look smokin' hot." He also asked her to come in his office and shut the door, then said "I haven't seen you in a while, give me a hug."
Bullshit, I don't believe for a second that he truly doesn't understand why this is sexual harassment. I think he's playing that game where as long as he says he doesn't understand something, he's justified in continuing to do it. That means no matter how many ways you look for to explain it to him, none of them will ever "work" since then he'd have to modify his behavior.
I think the thing to do here is make firm, clear rules (no commenting about womens' appearance, no touching, etc.) and let him know that if he doesn't comply with them, his job is in danger. I think he'll "understand" what counts as sexual harassment with a quickness after that.
posted by Ashley801 at 7:55 PM on August 17, 2011 [4 favorites]
Bullshit, I don't believe for a second that he truly doesn't understand why this is sexual harassment. I think he's playing that game where as long as he says he doesn't understand something, he's justified in continuing to do it. That means no matter how many ways you look for to explain it to him, none of them will ever "work" since then he'd have to modify his behavior.
I think the thing to do here is make firm, clear rules (no commenting about womens' appearance, no touching, etc.) and let him know that if he doesn't comply with them, his job is in danger. I think he'll "understand" what counts as sexual harassment with a quickness after that.
posted by Ashley801 at 7:55 PM on August 17, 2011 [4 favorites]
Wow. Wow. This guy is a major, major liability. He's a big, fat lawsuit waiting to happen. If he were doing pretty much anything else this level of inappropriate he would be gone, gone, gone. Do you have to explain to someone why it's a bad idea to pull their pants down and make a poopy on the floor in the middle of the office?
Wow again. This person needs to be reassigned to a position where he doesn't deal with vendors... or anyone. He should be scrambling to figure this stuff out with great alacrity. If he can't understand the job, he can't do the job; part of the job is not sexually harassing vendors, co-workers, clients, visitors, or the potted plant in the corner. Part of the job is not exposing your employer to a lawsuit. Damn.
Here are his rules: No touching. No leering. No commenting on appearance. No personal comments at all. No endearments: it's "Tom" or "Ann" or "Mr. Smith" or "Ms. Smith." Keep the office door fucking open. No exceptions, no excuses. He doesn't have to "understand" it, he just has to do it. If he can't do it, he can't work there.
posted by taz at 8:40 PM on August 17, 2011 [7 favorites]
Wow again. This person needs to be reassigned to a position where he doesn't deal with vendors... or anyone. He should be scrambling to figure this stuff out with great alacrity. If he can't understand the job, he can't do the job; part of the job is not sexually harassing vendors, co-workers, clients, visitors, or the potted plant in the corner. Part of the job is not exposing your employer to a lawsuit. Damn.
Here are his rules: No touching. No leering. No commenting on appearance. No personal comments at all. No endearments: it's "Tom" or "Ann" or "Mr. Smith" or "Ms. Smith." Keep the office door fucking open. No exceptions, no excuses. He doesn't have to "understand" it, he just has to do it. If he can't do it, he can't work there.
posted by taz at 8:40 PM on August 17, 2011 [7 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by telegraph at 7:25 PM on August 16, 2011 [21 favorites]