how to handle anonymous sexual harassment complaints?
April 2, 2017 9:00 AM Subscribe
I'm involved with a serial event whose attendees sometimes report sexual harassment. Typically, they request that the organizers not identify them to the people they claim harassed them. This is a reasonable request which everyone would like to honor, but how to do that? I'm hoping the hive mind knows of some example procedures that this organization can study.
Basically, nobody knows how to talk to the alleged harasser without essentially saying, "We can't say whom you offended, and we can't say what you were claimed to have done in enough detail for you to identify the incident, but we'd like to hear your side of the story." Or, worse, "Same as before, but we think you did do it, and you were wrong to have done it, and if it happens again we'll ..."
Not only do a lot of the organizers have principled objections to that approach, but it doesn't work. People who might otherwise discuss it in good faith are immediately put off by that approach. People who aren't acting in good faith get to hide behind "I don't know what you're talking about." It rules out some solutions because the nature of our events allows a pair of people to limit their interaction if they both know whom they're trying to avoid.
On the other hand, neither does it work to require people to be identified to those they accuse. They typically decline to involve the organizers except in the most egregious situations.
That has the obvious problem, and also an unanticipated second-order problem: people have been keeping quiet in cases where they object to the way they were treated, but don't think it was bad enough that anybody should get banned over it. (I'm perhaps disproportionately sad about this, because I see it as a missed opportunity to de-stigmatize genuinely inadvertent offenses. I think we'd do better for everyone if it were safer to admit to being still in the process of learning how to behave appropriately at these events.)
One thing that's been tried is to review the standards of behavior in the abstract. Like, "We're not specifically saying you're passing the salt wrong, but I've got a salt-shaker here and let's role-play as if I can't reach it..." Nobody is really sure how effective that is, and I'd love to hear from other people who have tried that.
One thing that probably won't work is to use anonymous reports only as a signal for the organizers to watch someone more closely. While that may have some deterrent effect, it's hard for a third party to catch someone "in the act". The nature of our events is that the same interaction can be appropriate or inappropriate depending only on whether one of the participants believes it so.
Basically, nobody knows how to talk to the alleged harasser without essentially saying, "We can't say whom you offended, and we can't say what you were claimed to have done in enough detail for you to identify the incident, but we'd like to hear your side of the story." Or, worse, "Same as before, but we think you did do it, and you were wrong to have done it, and if it happens again we'll ..."
Not only do a lot of the organizers have principled objections to that approach, but it doesn't work. People who might otherwise discuss it in good faith are immediately put off by that approach. People who aren't acting in good faith get to hide behind "I don't know what you're talking about." It rules out some solutions because the nature of our events allows a pair of people to limit their interaction if they both know whom they're trying to avoid.
On the other hand, neither does it work to require people to be identified to those they accuse. They typically decline to involve the organizers except in the most egregious situations.
That has the obvious problem, and also an unanticipated second-order problem: people have been keeping quiet in cases where they object to the way they were treated, but don't think it was bad enough that anybody should get banned over it. (I'm perhaps disproportionately sad about this, because I see it as a missed opportunity to de-stigmatize genuinely inadvertent offenses. I think we'd do better for everyone if it were safer to admit to being still in the process of learning how to behave appropriately at these events.)
One thing that's been tried is to review the standards of behavior in the abstract. Like, "We're not specifically saying you're passing the salt wrong, but I've got a salt-shaker here and let's role-play as if I can't reach it..." Nobody is really sure how effective that is, and I'd love to hear from other people who have tried that.
One thing that probably won't work is to use anonymous reports only as a signal for the organizers to watch someone more closely. While that may have some deterrent effect, it's hard for a third party to catch someone "in the act". The nature of our events is that the same interaction can be appropriate or inappropriate depending only on whether one of the participants believes it so.
This talk by Audrey Eschright at Open Source and Feelings has some relevant and practical advice for enforcing codes of conduct at events.
posted by thrungva at 9:43 AM on April 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
posted by thrungva at 9:43 AM on April 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
I have been an event organiser, and I feel that litigating the specific incident is not super useful and a big waste of everyone's time.
A script for you:
You: I want to make our event rules clear to you. It's not acceptable to touch other attendees without their consent, and it's not acceptable to continue talking to them after they've made it clear they are not interested.
Him: Why, who said I did that, I never did that, and doing that is fine anyway
You: I'm not going to discuss specific incidents with you. Do you understand that those are the rules here?
Him: But I didn't do that
You: Excellent, then you'll have no problem committing to sticking to those rules for the rest of the event?
Him: But but but bla bla bla
You: There are two options here, you abide by our rules or we will have to ask you to leave. Can you commit to sticking to those rules (and the rest of them which you can read in this handy document) while you are at this event?
Him: Argle bargle
You: (radioing security)
posted by emilyw at 10:21 AM on April 2, 2017 [81 favorites]
A script for you:
You: I want to make our event rules clear to you. It's not acceptable to touch other attendees without their consent, and it's not acceptable to continue talking to them after they've made it clear they are not interested.
Him: Why, who said I did that, I never did that, and doing that is fine anyway
You: I'm not going to discuss specific incidents with you. Do you understand that those are the rules here?
Him: But I didn't do that
You: Excellent, then you'll have no problem committing to sticking to those rules for the rest of the event?
Him: But but but bla bla bla
You: There are two options here, you abide by our rules or we will have to ask you to leave. Can you commit to sticking to those rules (and the rest of them which you can read in this handy document) while you are at this event?
Him: Argle bargle
You: (radioing security)
posted by emilyw at 10:21 AM on April 2, 2017 [81 favorites]
The nature of our events is that the same interaction can be appropriate or inappropriate depending only on whether one of the participants believes it so.
I suspect this framing is a big part of the problem, because it's unlikely to be true, or at least not the full truth. (E.g., If someone catcalls me, and I don't particularly mind, that doesn't mean that catcalling is an appropriate behavior.) It sounds like it's about permission, and whether the offender has permission (explicit or implicit) to do the action or not. I would work with the people who have been victims and try to hash out better guidelines or models for what sorts of behaviors require permission in advance, and what constitutes that permission.
posted by lazuli at 10:34 AM on April 2, 2017 [9 favorites]
I suspect this framing is a big part of the problem, because it's unlikely to be true, or at least not the full truth. (E.g., If someone catcalls me, and I don't particularly mind, that doesn't mean that catcalling is an appropriate behavior.) It sounds like it's about permission, and whether the offender has permission (explicit or implicit) to do the action or not. I would work with the people who have been victims and try to hash out better guidelines or models for what sorts of behaviors require permission in advance, and what constitutes that permission.
posted by lazuli at 10:34 AM on April 2, 2017 [9 favorites]
I would work with the people who have been victims and try to hash out better guidelines or models for what sorts of behaviors require permission in advance, and what constitutes that permission.
Sorry, didn't finish the thought.... And then once guidelines have been created, institute those guidelines for all attendees to the events.
posted by lazuli at 10:36 AM on April 2, 2017
Sorry, didn't finish the thought.... And then once guidelines have been created, institute those guidelines for all attendees to the events.
posted by lazuli at 10:36 AM on April 2, 2017
OK so in case you don't know this already, having a Code of Conduct for events is a super common (and important) thing and there are ones available for you to reuse. DIYing this is probably not a good idea.
Enforcement is of course a different beast. Here's an article that has some more ideas on how to deal with incidents once they've been reported.
posted by emilyw at 10:57 AM on April 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
Enforcement is of course a different beast. Here's an article that has some more ideas on how to deal with incidents once they've been reported.
posted by emilyw at 10:57 AM on April 2, 2017 [10 favorites]
Since a lot of the generic codes of conduct are more about conferences, you might also try googling "[name of activity] code of conduct" for examples that are more particular to your situation, assuming it's not a conference-y activity.
posted by lazuli at 11:02 AM on April 2, 2017
posted by lazuli at 11:02 AM on April 2, 2017
I am part of a community that has a history of such violations at big events and is struggling to find solutions that are fair to both sides. I would recommend contacting other event organizers in your community and asking what they've tried to implement.
I think that some important ideas include:
-- A team on call specifically to deal with incidents as soon as they are reported. This needs to include people outside the "in group" and the organizers' clique (we have had problems with incidents involving "important" people getting ignored).
-- Very clear guidelines on what is and is not ok, given to everyone and prominently posted. Possibly have everyone read and sign it at check in? And/or mandatory intro sessions about consent and harassment?
-- A list of reported incidents and a list of reported offenders. Multiple reports about someone should be a pretty clear signal that something is wrong.
-- Encouraging bystanders to speak up, offer help, report incidents
--Visible and alert security staff
posted by mkuhnell at 11:37 AM on April 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I think that some important ideas include:
-- A team on call specifically to deal with incidents as soon as they are reported. This needs to include people outside the "in group" and the organizers' clique (we have had problems with incidents involving "important" people getting ignored).
-- Very clear guidelines on what is and is not ok, given to everyone and prominently posted. Possibly have everyone read and sign it at check in? And/or mandatory intro sessions about consent and harassment?
-- A list of reported incidents and a list of reported offenders. Multiple reports about someone should be a pretty clear signal that something is wrong.
-- Encouraging bystanders to speak up, offer help, report incidents
--Visible and alert security staff
posted by mkuhnell at 11:37 AM on April 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I think as a group your guidelines need to get much clearer. Like, this "The nature of our events is that the same interaction can be appropriate or inappropriate depending only on whether one of the participants believes it so" is sort of a no go. I think you should get a lot clearer on what is or is not acceptable, and put it in much more explicit terms so that everyone can be clear about when someone is violating the rules. Like, if dating among participants is not ok, it's not ok. If it's ok to ask someone on a date, then you need to be clear with people that in and of itself, that's not harassment, but then that people have to take no as a full and complete answer and if they keep pushing/asking after a "no," that behavior is unacceptable. Etc.
posted by rainbowbrite at 1:40 PM on April 2, 2017
posted by rainbowbrite at 1:40 PM on April 2, 2017
Basically, nobody knows how to talk to the alleged harasser without essentially saying, "We can't say whom you offended, and we can't say what you were claimed to have done in enough detail for you to identify the incident, but we'd like to hear your side of the story." Or, worse, "Same as before, but we think you did do it, and you were wrong to have done it, and if it happens again we'll ..."
You might have to say just that. Set up a clear code of conduct of how consent matters in interactions, so what might be either wise permissible isn't if one person says it isn't. And if someone violates that then have these bad and uncomfortable conversations. You don't have to have a trial of their peers for the accused in order to make it be and feel like a safer place for all.
posted by RainyJay at 3:46 PM on April 2, 2017
You might have to say just that. Set up a clear code of conduct of how consent matters in interactions, so what might be either wise permissible isn't if one person says it isn't. And if someone violates that then have these bad and uncomfortable conversations. You don't have to have a trial of their peers for the accused in order to make it be and feel like a safer place for all.
posted by RainyJay at 3:46 PM on April 2, 2017
I think I understand the fact actions can be okay or not okay. Like, in some kinds of partner yoga or partner dancing, a certain hold or contact of hands, chests, foreheads, can be completely fine in one moment, between one set of people, and not at all okay in another. Consent is required and can be revoked at any time. Just sharing this for people who are confused about it.
I think laying out the guidelines generally to everyone is helpful. Perhaps incorporate the rules and appropriate role playing across the activity--explore a different one each time you meet, include them in classes, things like that. Try to get closer to the point where the people who cross boundaries inadvertently will be less likely to do so, thanks to their skill and education.
I wonder if, thanks to this education, you'd get fewer of the "not really that bad" offenders objecting to the manner of your interaction with then. Part of your work may be to help them understand why this way of interacting is important. Set the expectation of how the conversation will go, before it happens, so the offender isn't dealing with figuring that out at the same time as feeling hurt or defensive about the alleged offense.
One group I went to said at the introductory session: "This action is okay, but only in these conditions, and if you do it differently I will find you and we're going to have a conversation."
Then, when an infraction comes up, can you tell the offender which of the rules they've broken? And, yeah, try the role play?
Is this happening often enough that you can refer to multiple, similar incidents, allowing for anonymity in the particulars?
Are you providing adequate support for the reporters, and taking good steps to maintain a safe space? Does everyone find out, coming in, how incidents will be dealt with?
posted by ramenopres at 5:31 PM on April 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I think laying out the guidelines generally to everyone is helpful. Perhaps incorporate the rules and appropriate role playing across the activity--explore a different one each time you meet, include them in classes, things like that. Try to get closer to the point where the people who cross boundaries inadvertently will be less likely to do so, thanks to their skill and education.
I wonder if, thanks to this education, you'd get fewer of the "not really that bad" offenders objecting to the manner of your interaction with then. Part of your work may be to help them understand why this way of interacting is important. Set the expectation of how the conversation will go, before it happens, so the offender isn't dealing with figuring that out at the same time as feeling hurt or defensive about the alleged offense.
One group I went to said at the introductory session: "This action is okay, but only in these conditions, and if you do it differently I will find you and we're going to have a conversation."
Then, when an infraction comes up, can you tell the offender which of the rules they've broken? And, yeah, try the role play?
Is this happening often enough that you can refer to multiple, similar incidents, allowing for anonymity in the particulars?
Are you providing adequate support for the reporters, and taking good steps to maintain a safe space? Does everyone find out, coming in, how incidents will be dealt with?
posted by ramenopres at 5:31 PM on April 2, 2017 [2 favorites]
I feel best practice is in part asking the person reporting what they want the solution to be.
Do they just want it documented? Do they want a structured discussion? Do they want so and so warned and future violations may lead to dismissal? Do they want to take part out or do they want it to be anonymous?
It is empowering and can create safety to be able to have discussions about these things in some instances, but in others just a, clear stop that don't do it again we don't tolerate this is enough.
But this stuff is hard, requires staff and volunteers to be aware of power dynamics, and you would want some sort of social worker or counselor on site. Depending on the topic, that may just not be possible.
posted by AlexiaSky at 5:39 PM on April 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
Do they just want it documented? Do they want a structured discussion? Do they want so and so warned and future violations may lead to dismissal? Do they want to take part out or do they want it to be anonymous?
It is empowering and can create safety to be able to have discussions about these things in some instances, but in others just a, clear stop that don't do it again we don't tolerate this is enough.
But this stuff is hard, requires staff and volunteers to be aware of power dynamics, and you would want some sort of social worker or counselor on site. Depending on the topic, that may just not be possible.
posted by AlexiaSky at 5:39 PM on April 2, 2017 [1 favorite]
Mod note: One deleted. OP has asked for example procedures that this organization can study. For everyone: If you have direct examples, direct experience handling sexual harassment procedures for an event or event(s), or legitimately helpful suggestions for locating knowledgeable advice specifically in this area, that's fine, but "here is my personal opinion even though I don't know much about it" isn't what OP is looking for here, so let's keep this strictly on-point and useful. Thanks.
posted by taz (staff) at 12:34 AM on April 3, 2017
posted by taz (staff) at 12:34 AM on April 3, 2017
My self-defense school put together some harassment policy and procedure resources, including step-by-step "how to take a harassment report" guidelines and sample forms. They may be helpful for framing the situation.
posted by restless_nomad at 9:37 AM on April 3, 2017
posted by restless_nomad at 9:37 AM on April 3, 2017
The nature of our events is that the same interaction can be appropriate or inappropriate depending only on whether one of the participants believes it so.
Not knowing anything about the nature of your events, it sounds like the important factor here is consent.
If that is the case, you need to be making rules about consent. Not about whether people "believe" something -- about what people actually say. You need to work on building a culture of consent where people ask things like "may I (verb) your (noun)?" (or whatever sentence structure would work for your event), not this thing where people start interacting and then it's either appropriate or not depending on someone's private thoughts about what they believe that they didn't share with anyone.
The organizers need to talk about consent and model that. People need to be talking about consent, even when they are sure of what they both believe, so that everyone can get practice with consent.
Basically, you need to get all Ask Culture. No more guessing what people believe to be so. Asking if it's OK first, before these interactions happen; instead of guessing what people believe, acting, and then finding out it was inappropriate after the fact based on things that only one party to the interaction knew.
posted by yohko at 1:35 PM on April 4, 2017 [1 favorite]
Not knowing anything about the nature of your events, it sounds like the important factor here is consent.
If that is the case, you need to be making rules about consent. Not about whether people "believe" something -- about what people actually say. You need to work on building a culture of consent where people ask things like "may I (verb) your (noun)?" (or whatever sentence structure would work for your event), not this thing where people start interacting and then it's either appropriate or not depending on someone's private thoughts about what they believe that they didn't share with anyone.
The organizers need to talk about consent and model that. People need to be talking about consent, even when they are sure of what they both believe, so that everyone can get practice with consent.
Basically, you need to get all Ask Culture. No more guessing what people believe to be so. Asking if it's OK first, before these interactions happen; instead of guessing what people believe, acting, and then finding out it was inappropriate after the fact based on things that only one party to the interaction knew.
posted by yohko at 1:35 PM on April 4, 2017 [1 favorite]
« Older How do you make your brain change gears? | In Dictee by Theresa Cha, what is the origin of... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by melissasaurus at 9:24 AM on April 2, 2017 [8 favorites]