|
Canadian Society, Political Correctness etc.. (pg. 8)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
I don't know about that, Margs. "Harassment" by definition refers to repetitive behaviour, and sexual harassment is persistent sexual advances. You think someone would have a case with just that one comment? I sincerely hope not!
|
Well, I actually hope SO. If a woman wouldn't have a case with just one comment then I would be scared. For sexual harassment the literal meaning of harassment is much more lax. Does a girl have to get raped twice to have it count in court. |
|
|
| ahlamalek |
| quote: | Originally posted by StereoPrincess
Well, I actually hope SO. If a woman wouldn't have a case with just one comment then I would be scared. For sexual harassment the literal meaning of harassment is much more lax. Does a girl have to get raped twice to have it count in court. |
by the same guy or 2 different guys ?!?! hahahahah
just joking, obviously you're right :) |
|
|
| DigiNut |
| quote: | Originally posted by StereoPrincess
Well, I actually hope SO. If a woman wouldn't have a case with just one comment then I would be scared. For sexual harassment the literal meaning of harassment is much more lax. Does a girl have to get raped twice to have it count in court. |
Just out of curiosity, you do realize that the term "sexual harassment" was originally coined to apply to the workplace? You do understand that it's actually part of the Canadian Labour Code, and not part of the Criminal Code? It's only very recently that people have tried to extend it to ordinary on-the-street situations; it does not and should not apply to such circumstances. The law was intended to curb situations that would prevent a woman in the workplace from doing her job properly. The Criminal Code deals solely with sexual assault, i.e. blatant unwanted physical sexual conduct with another person. Does that mean that a girl has to get raped twice? Of course not! But it does mean that the guy she's charging actually has to touch her, otherwise she's got no case.
I'm sure I could be wrong about this - if so, please show me a credible link that defines sexual harassment outside the context of employment or education.
I think women should have to choose: are they empowered, capable people that can run their own lives and make their own decisions, or are they poor defenseless china dolls that can never hope to overcome the opression of the sex-hungry animals known as men? Come on now, one or the other, you can't be both.
If a guy jumps you on the street and tries to rape you, or even just gropes you, then yeah there is definitely legal recourse, but since when is a girl incapable of dealing with an verbally obnoxious guy on her own? She needs the law to help her out why exactly?
Brainwashing. Ever read Disclosure? I'm not a masculinist at all, in fact, the reason I'm arguing this is that I don't believe in the superiority of either sex, although I do believe that there are fundamental differences that go beyond the genitals.
And yes Emery, I am bitter, bitter that you ignored my plea for help with PvD tickets and then went out to get 'em for other people. :whip: Bitter about this though? Nah, not really, just very vocal, I don't believe in "political correctness." |
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
As it turns out sexual harassment is actually governend by the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/publication...ar_lcdp.asp?l=e
I also did not know any of this.
| quote: |
for a practice to be considered harassment it must be reasonably perceived as a term or condition of employment (including availability or continuation of work, promotional or training opportunities) or of the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public; or influence decisions on such matters; or interfere with job performance or access to or enjoyment of goods, services, facilities or accommodation; or humiliate, insult or intimidate any individual; |
To apply the meaning to the above mentioned situation. The girl's right to enjoy services (going to a bar) available to the general public would have been taken away from her. Also she would feel humiliated, insulted and intimidated. I personally think that human right violations are very serious, sometimes more morally wrong then petty crimes.
Its a right of humans to be able to enjoy all things equally. I personally would not bring such a thing to court but a woman that does has a perfect right too. As well as a man has the same right. If a man feels to ashamed to report harassment occurances, what does that have to do with the woman's right to do the same? |
|
|
| DigiNut |
Ok Margs, I understand all that, but the header to all that is that it's a "discriminatory practice", and therefore only apples to situations where the "harassing" person is in some position of authority. You can't discriminate against someone for whom you're not offering any goods or services.
Let's digress for a minute with a totally hypothetical example: If a black man walks into a 7-11 to buy a magazine, and some random white guy beside him snatches the last copy and says to the black man's face, "Sorry, this magazine's for white guys only" - do you think that this white guy can be sued and/or criminally charged? No. Is it crude, immoral, and generally detestable behaviour? Yes. Is there legal recourse? No! However, if the owner of the store refused to sell him that magazine, then he could be charged.
Do you understand what I'm saying here? The affirmative action/human rights laws aren't there to give people a way to get revenge on other people who say or do things that might be politically incorrect or downright rude. People are entitled to be rude. The laws are there to protect people who could not otherwise protect themselves. The black guy in this example could just as easily give the finger to the white guy and try to wrestle the magazine out of his hands, but if it's the store owner that refuses to sell it to the black guy, the guy can't do anything about it without legal aid.
The guy who hits on a girl in the bar isn't "taking away her right" to enjoy the service provided by the bar... now if the bouncer says the girl can't come in unless she takes her top off, then that's harassment. If a stranger asks her if she wants to f*ck? No, it's not.
Hopefully you see where I'm going with this... the law is meant to be an armor, not a weapon, and I think it's unfortunate that people try to use it as the latter.
Edit: by the way, this isn't anything personal, just hoping that's understood... just defending my opinion here. ;) |
|
|
| Durafei |
| quote: | Originally posted by 'mju:zik
Funny how Durfei STILL HASN'T POSTED HOW HE KNOWS WHO GOT THE POSTER BUSTED. I WONDER WHY!?!? |
Dude, please read all the posts.. I posted this earlier:
| quote: | | She saw it through the window(the door to this lab has a window) |
|
|
|
| StereoPrincess |
| quote: | Originally posted by DigiNut
Let's digress for a minute with a totally hypothetical example: If a black man walks into a 7-11 to buy a magazine, and some random white guy beside him snatches the last copy and says to the black man's face, "Sorry, this magazine's for white guys only" - do you think that this white guy can be sued and/or criminally charged? No. Is it crude, immoral, and generally detestable behaviour? Yes. Is there legal recourse? No! However, if the owner of the store refused to sell him that magazine, then he could be charged. |
I can see where you are going with this but I just think we are interpreting this law a different way, and this means that it will probably cause problems in many cases and will probably be adjusted after some prominant case. Harassment does not have to be from a person of authority. For example, if I have a phone stalker calling me and harassing me, that person is not in a place of authority because I may not know who they are but they are infringing on my right to feel confortable picking up the phone. In the 7-11 case, there is no past case to go on. I do understand where you are coming from though. That is a good example but I would personally interpret that case as definite harassment. A service is being stopped because of racist ideas, no matter who causes it. Technically, the store owner could be held partly responsible for not stopping it.
| quote: | | Do you understand what I'm saying here? The affirmative action/human rights laws aren't there to give people a way to get revenge on other people who say or do things that might be politically incorrect or downright rude. |
Even criminal laws aren't meant as revenge. It's justice. You mentioned earlier that you would like equality for all humans, these human right laws try to guarantee that
| quote: | The guy who hits on a girl in the bar isn't "taking away her right" to enjoy the service provided by the bar... now if the bouncer says the girl can't come in unless she takes her top off, then that's harassment. If a stranger asks her if she wants to f*ck? No, it's not.
|
Again, I personally think that if a guy says what was the original example then he is definitely taking away a right and humiliating the girl. Hitting on a girl is way different then asking her if you can slap you dick in between her . |
|
|
| 'mju:zik |
| quote: | Originally posted by Durafei
Dude, please read all the posts.. I posted this earlier: |
DUDE, all you said was that she saw it, you didn't say HOW YOU KNEW she saw it...thats a big difference. I did read all the posts, DUDE. |
|
|
| Durafei |
| quote: | Originally posted by 'mju:zik
DUDE, all you said was that she saw it, you didn't say HOW YOU KNEW she saw it...thats a big difference. I did read all the posts, DUDE. |
hehe.. again, read all the posts;
| quote: | | I know that it was a HER to complained about us, because on our local newsgroup discussion a person to whom the complaint was first addressed, posted that it was a woman that complained. |
|
|
|
| 'mju:zik |
| quote: | Originally posted by Durafei
hehe.. again, read all the posts; |
did this person say what woman? or just "a woman?" doesnt it sound like a pressed answer. like i dont have to tell u so im gonna make up this "woman" because thats convenient for obvious reasons. |
|
|
| 'mju:zik |
| youre just giving hear-say, no real answer. |
|
|
| Durafei |
| quote: | Originally posted by 'mju:zik
did this person say what woman? or just "a woman?" doesnt it sound like a pressed answer. like i dont have to tell u so im gonna make up this "woman" because thats convenient for obvious reasons. |
, THAT WAS A woman who complained..
The person who posted on the newsgroup wasn't just anybody. It was a course instructor(also female) for CS 342. She wouldn't lie in her posting. So, the girl who saw the poster, got offended, complained to that female instructor, who in turn posted on newsgroup that it was a woman that complained. |
|
|
|
|
