What Needs to Happen

February 28th, 2008 by: PioneerAdmin

Coping, writing and working  through your feelings

I, by no means, have all the answers – but I can share with you how I have gotten through the last 14 months. I’d be lying if I wasn’t honest and didn’t tell you I’ve felt very desperate, very alone at times.

I have started writing and I write a lot. Everyday. I journal for myself and I write to Representatives and Senators from my State, I write to the Governor, I write to our Congresspeople, I write to the president-elects, I write to stars and people with perceived power that could make a difference in the subject of sexual harassment. If they have a website and contact info – they get either a hand written note or an e-mail.

Some of these people I have written to more than once. I wrote an article for a Women’s Newspaper last summer and they ran with it and it felt incredibly liberating because I was being heard. I write because I need to talk for those who don’t have a voice and I need to make a change in our society for the way women are treated in academia, work, etc. I guess I have decided this was suppose to be a part of my life and while I would not have chosen being sexually harassed – the assistance, the help, the experience, the lessons, I can share with someone and help them – in the end is the reward from what I went through. At the end of the day, I rely on my spirituality to get me through and I think God had a greater plan for me.

Be prepared that you may not always get great responses – I wrote a letter recently to a very influential women in my own community and she wrote me a letter back saying – “I just can’t believe you’ve let this affect you so greatly, just ignore it and get on”….I cried when I read this, but it also ignited a fire in me and I decided to push even harder to make a change – it’s about changing one mind at a time. But, it made me start making contacts again with magazines and newspaper and two of them will be doing a story on sexual harassment in the months to come.

Maybe writing isn’t for you – but I have found it to be an incredible outlet for me and making others aware of the sick behavior we all have to endure. At first, it may have been about making sure my company felt the pain, but I’ve moved past that – and it’s now about making sure we have law changes and stricter fines. I’ve often said sexual harassment is a form of sexual assault – if people get jail terms for sexual assault and harassment is a form of that – why aren’t these people getting jail terms, police records, you name it. The second thing is – the laws need to change – so that when people knowingly do the crime – they do the time. And, what I mean by that is the fines need to be so catastrophic that the company is either forced to adhere to the law or they can file bankruptcy. I do think our time is coming and I do think things are about to change.

I wanted to end this by saying – there is no one that understands sexual harassment fully unless you have gone through it. It’s not about getting over it – it’s about society finally doing the right thing and making sure “we have nothing to get over”.

You’ve Got To Be Kidding Me

March 1st, 2007 by: Ceara

Stupid and Irresponsible Responses To Sexual Harassment

While victims and targets get all the flack, administrators win hands down in the “stupid responses to sexual harassment” contest.  Whether they are over-reacting, or ignoring blatantly serious problems, no one comes close when it comes to irresponsible, ignorant, or just-plain-lazy approaches to the problem.

Of these, administrators in Education are the kings and queens of stupidity.  It’s scary that those in charge of teaching kids to think do not seem to be able to think themselves.  (Seems that educators have not considered “education” as a method for dealing with SH.)

I’m starting this as a build-on-it post, and will be adding press releases, links to articles, and anecdotes of good examples of stupidity in dealing with/not dealing with sexual harassment. 

If you come across any, or know of any, add them by posting a comment here.  (Please note, all first comments must be approved by the admin before they will appear on the blog.)

Below are a few of what I’m sure will be many additions.

———————————————————————————————

Ignoring Serious Problems:

School officials ignore repeated complaints of teens exposing themselves to autistic classmate

**********

In a Communications course I took, one man complained that his grade-school-age son was getting in trouble at school for chronically molesting his female classmates.  The father was positive that this was happening because of the extreme adult content in the R-rated movies they (father and son) watched together.  He was really frustrated about it all.  But when it was suggested that the father quit watching those kinds of movies with his son, he replied, shocked, “but I want to watch those movies!” –Ceara

***********

School board ignores complaint about sh by chairman, then suspends president for blowing the whistle

************

The principal wouldn’t do anything because there were only two days of school left (from the SHS Stories and Experiences site)

*************

 

Over-reactions to Sexual Harassment:  Can we even call any of these “sexual harassment?”

6-year-old suspended

**********

Maryland 5-year-old accused of pinching buttocks

**********

Four-year-old suspended for hugging teacher’s aid 

**********

“(This is) sort of like how I heard our custodian, Mike, was actually fired… it explains his absense. I heard the reason why is because he hugged a student, but everyone knew Mike and hugged him all the time. He didn’t make innapropriate advances to any student, and now he’s not there anymore.” –Lacune  (Update: Mike was suspended, not fired, still it’s pretty extreme for this kind of “hugging.”)

 

 

 

Don’t Foam at the Mouth

February 17th, 2007 by: Ceara

“Rabid” Reactions To Sexual Harassment Make Things Worse, Not Better    

I’ve come across this too many times now to keep quiet about it.  While most people who have been harassed really just want the behavior to stop, there is a “type” of victim (as there are “types” of harassers) who really IS just about getting attention.  They are in the minority, but they do a lot to discredit seriousness of the problem, and are making it difficult for many people to learn about the real issues involved in sexual harassment.

I tend to call these types “the rabid ones.”  These are people who DO experience sexual harassment, but in most cases they were not being targeted specifically.  They just had bosses or coworkers who are immature and sexist, and/or were having to work in mildly sexualized environments.  In many cases, the attitudes were not extremely sexist, or the harassment not really that extreme.  Even if they were targeted specifically, the harassment is usually mild or very short lived.  These are the types of situations where some SH training as part of team building exercises is due, and nothing much else. 

But “the rabid ones” are always out for revenge, and educating harassers is not enough for them.  They need to make the situation be “all about me.”  They want someone to pay, dammit!!  They want someone fired!!! They can go on rampages that actually turn a small problem into a serious one, and lead to a lot of permanent damage-usually to the harassment complainant. (In many cases “the rabid ones” are people with egos as big–if not bigger–than their harassers, and the harassment is actually more of an ego blow than a violation.) 

When no one jumps to avenge the transgression, and their ”needs” are not met, a “rabid one” may develop post-traumatic stress disorder from the trauma of it all.   Yes, you CAN get PTSD from sexual harassment, but it has to be pretty extreme or very chronic, and in most cases accompanied by a lot of retaliation and/or backlash. If any of these people are REALLY getting PTSD from mild or short-lived harassment, they are people who were already at the edge from something else or something old, and the new situation just tipped them overboard. 

(I have to interject here that I’m alarmed at the rate that PTSD is being diagnosed over some pretty mild and/or short-lived harassment experiences–seems that a lot of psychologists don’t know the difference between stress/anxiety, traumatic stress, and PTSD).

Most people have been harassed in their lives, and some of us experience very serious and chronic situations that are life altering–but this does not describe the majority of situations.  Most situations are mild and done out of ignorance/immaturity/stress/situational.  Most harassers are not evil or even predatory.  Most are just stupid.  Few deserve to “die,” few even deserve to get fired or suspended.

I’m not saying it isn’t okay to be angry about even mild harassment.  It is okay.  It’s even okay to be extremely angry at mild harassment.  Just take responsibility for your own reactions.  If your feelings are not in proportion with the transgression, you need to look more closely at yourself.  Yes, confront the harassment if you wish, just don’t insist someone else pay dearly for your own issues.

A sexual harassment complainant should always be committed to working towards a constructive solution. 

Also, being sexually harassed is not an excuse to abandon all reason and compassion.  If you deal with bullying or abuse by becoming a bully yourself, you really have nothing to complain about.  You are no better than the people who harassed you.

If you find yourself being harassed–don’t start foaming at the mouth.  First, try to understand what is really going on.  You may be surprised.  While there are a handful of sick individuals out there targeting people, you are probably dealing with an actual human being, just like yourself.  You might even learn something very valuable in the process. 

For info on how to deal with sexual harassers: CLICK HERE

 

Stalking as a by-product of sexual harassment law

February 6th, 2007 by: Ceara

The increase in stalking cases a result of determined sexual harassers looking for alternative methods to target victims

When it comes to sexual harassment, there is a vast range of behavior.  Much of it will not justify (or win) any lawsuits, but this doesn’t change the nature of what it is.  And quite  a few experts have described categories of harassers, and types of harassment, to help make some sense out of the confusion that most people feel about the issue.

Still, I tend to categorize most harassers into two main groups–real harassers, and situational/immature harassers.  The latter are people who are harassing out of ignorance, immaturity, or because they are going through their own life traumas.  They aren’t really evil, or exploitative, just under stress (medical or personal) or are acting out of ignorance.  They take responsibility for their actions or, at least, if given some education, they stop harassing. 

Real harassers are abusers or predators who are out to exploit, and care only about their own needs and agendas.  A real harasser is someone who will continue to try to harass or predate despite sexual harassment law, and even after being given education about the seriousness of their actions, or the effects of their actions.  In most cases, they will simply blame the victim.  They rarely take responsibility themselves.  They will just change their tactics so that they can continue to harass and exploit in such a way that the victim/s, or the law, can’t do anything about it.

One method for real harassers is stalking.  Most forms of stalking are forms of sexual harassment because they are attempts to force a relationship with someone who is unwilling or unavailable.  Stalking is the extreme, but covert, version of refusing to take ”No,” or “Leave me alone!” for an answer–you know, behaviors that were the catalysts for sexual harassment law.  

Stalking has always been a problem, but experts will tell you that it is clearly on the rise. 

I think the increase in stalking is partially a result of sexual harassment law, and real sexual harassers looking for ways to target their victims without fear of consequence for their actions.  Because it is covert, it helps them get around sexual harassment law.  It enables them to harass anonymously, and to more easily mask their motives and intentions.  It also makes gathering evidence next to impossible for the victim, and without concrete evidence, there is no hope for them to even get an investigation. 

 On top of this, it makes the victim look paranoid, if not crazy, if they should report the problem to anyone. 

In it’s most subtle forms (i.e. surveillance, sending anonymous “love” mail/emails, hang-up phone calls), stalking can be like a chinese water torture.  However, most stalking methods are more extreme, invasive, and destructive. (Breaking and entering, phone tapping, computer hacking, character defamation and slander, obscene mail or phone calls, etc.)  Some stalkers will try to organize groups of people to assist them in their harassment campaign–called gang stalking or organized stalking.  They usually seek out people in their victim’s community, utilizing the victim’s ”real world” community and/or Internet communities.  In fact, stalkers often work to take control of, or destroy, a victim’s support network, resources, and options.  This leaves the victim vulnerable, or even dependant on the stalker for survival, at least in the mind of the stalker. 

Being stalked is NOT flattering–it is a form of psychological abuse and violence, just as most sexual harassment is a form of psychological abuse and violence.  And while stalking motives are usually sexual (or love obsessional), the stalking behaviors themselves may not be–that is another way real harassers can use it to get around sexual harassment law.  (For example, watching someone over an extended period of time isn’t overtly sexual, at least not in of itself.) 

Moreover, the psychological damage to the victim can be devastating.  One expert writes, ”Stalking is a form of mental assault, in which the perpetrator repeatedly, unwantedly, and disruptively breaks into the life-world of the victim, with whom he (or she) has no relationship (or no longer has)….Moreover, the separated acts that make up the intrusion cannot by themselves cause the mental abuse, but do taken together (cumulative effect).” (Rokkers)  

To most stalking victims, being stalked is like being put through a long, slow rape.  For gang stalking victims, it’s like a gang rape.  (The very insightful judge in the Christina Orozco case referred to her actions as akin to “murder.”) 

And being stalked can be very frightening, regardless of whether or not the stalker’s activities are overtly violent.  Physical attacks, even murders, can occur after long periods of ”more passive” stalking activities.  Often, the violence is precipitated by the stalker’s being forced to face they have been rejected by their target.  Besides suffering the psychological damage, and damage to life, reputation, relationships, and options, most stalking victims live in fear that something will push their stalkers over the edge to physical violence.

Unfortunately, if a state or country recognizes stalking at all, this is mostly in the context of direct/overt violence, or clearly escalating violence.  So, if a stalker avoids overtly violent acts, they can pretty much do as they please.   In other words, if the stalker does not threaten or attack, a stalking victim is out of luck.  They will not even be able to get a restraining order. 

This all makes stalking a pretty good method for frustrated real sexual harassers who are denied their “outlets” because of sexual harassment law.  As long as they use stalking to disguise their motives, activities, and/or their identities, they are free from worry about being held accountable by sexual harassment law.  And as long as they keep their stalking activities from being/seeming overtly violent, they will suffer no consequence from stalking law.  Even better (for them), they can operate for as long as they wish.     

And there is nothing the victim can do about it.  (Suicides have been reported as victims use this as the only means they have to bringing an end to the harassment.)  

It also makes stalking a good retaliation tactic for harassers who have been disciplined (i.e. been demoted, lost job) as many are using this as a way of getting revenge against an harassment target who filed a grievance against them–retaliation laws do not include stalking, either. 

In my own situation, I took a course from the female professor who turned out to be a lesbian who quickly became interested in me.  (That I’m not a lesbian didn’t deter her as she became obsessed with getting me to “try it” with her.)  She began by making a pass, which she clearly saw right off the bat was a mistake, particularly since she did it in front of witnesses.  But like most real harassers, she was not willing to give up.  She simply revised her methods and began stalking me with an extraordinary determination.  It is still amazing to me how far she went, and the depth and breadth or her obsession. 

She used classic stalking tactics, such as surveillance and character defamation, the latter enabling her to destroy not only my reputation, but all my relationships and options, both personal and professional.  She used cyberstalking extensively in her pursuit and surveillance, using this to watch me and try to interact with me at numerous Internet forums.  She even organized groups of people to assist her (gang stalking), enlisting people not only in my “real world” but also in Internet communities I frequented, or she thought I might join.  Because she was a department chair and a psychologist, no one questioned her character or motives.

Still, by using stalking and cyberstalking rather than “traditional” methods of sexual harassment, she has enough protection that I will probably never be able to do anything to stop her, let alone get any relief or reparation.  Like most schools when it comes to harassment of students by teachers, the university is doing nothing despite my repeated complaints about her behavior–and yes, they know she has been stalking me.  The did send her on a very brief–probably paid–leave of absence, during which she cyberstalked me the entire time.  And despite the extensive damage to me and my life, it seems her only punishment is that she is no longer department chair.  She is still teaching (scary) and still stalking. 

It seems the University of St. Thomas doesn’t care much about the character of those in charge of mentoring their students–this is a role model???? 

Even worse, the Department of Education (DOE) has flat-out refused to investigate because they do not recognize stalking as a form of abuse or discrimination like they do sexual harassment, and they would not accept that stalking IS a form of sexual harassment.  Moreover, they refused to spend even a minute to educate themselves about stalking and how stalkers operate–which would have proven it is a form of sexual harassment AND retaliation–even though I gave them the contact information of an expert at the National Center for the Victims of Crime who had volunteered to consult with them about it. 

The DOE people also basically accused me of making the whole thing up.

And, of course, since this very sick professor has not done anything overtly violent, I’m out of luck in getting any kind of restraining order which she would probably ignore, anyway. 

Current stalking laws are woefully inadequate, and don’t even begin to confront the problem, let alone deal with it.  But even if the laws are revised to protect victims from the psychological violence of stalking, real harassers will simply find other ways to abuse.  Any stumbling block placed before them, they will get around.  It is a game to them.  It is in their nature.  

For more about this story, and the way the CURRENT psychology chair at University of St. Thomas is “approaching” this situation–which includes EXTREME sexual abuses–click here

We have dedicated all of SHS to the University of St. Thomas in Houston, Texas, for their gross negligence, and even grosser lack of ethics, in dealing with sexual harassment and stalking by their faculty was the true inspiration for the creation of this community.

For more information about stalking, see:

Stalking and Types of Stalkers

To read true true stories of stalking and the effects, see also the Stalking category at our Stories and Experiences site

 

Not really as extreme as is sounds: murder plot in retaliation for sexual harassment complaint

December 4th, 2006 by: Ceara

On first read, this sounds pretty extreme in terms of retaliation against a sexual harassment complainant.  But in actuality, many of us experience retaliation that is akin to murder, if not in the physical sense.  As the judge put it in the Christina Orozco stalking case, you can murder a person in other ways, such as by destroying their reputation, their relationships, their job prospects, their life, etc.   

While this story below reports the most extreme attempt at retaliation that I’ve come across, from my own experience, and what I know about what happens in the aftermath of many other sexual harassment situations, it doesn’t surprise me in the least. 

For even more surprising responses, go to the website to read the discussion comments on this article–one guy was actually complaining about this professor getting suspended for plotting the murder.  (He viewed it as a violation of the man’s civil rights–puh-lease!)

 

from Inside Higher Ed
June 12, 2006

Plot to Kill a Colleague

State prosecutors in Virginia charged a professor at Tidewater Community College last week with plotting to murder a departmental colleague who had filed a sexual harassment complaint against him.

College officials suspended Jay A. Glosser on Friday, citing his arrest on “serious criminal charges involving another TCC faculty member.” In a statement, college officials said that Glosser, an associate professor of information systems technology at the college’s Norfolk campus, “has been temporarily relieved of all college-related duties and responsibilities pending the outcome of the charges against him.” The statement said that Glosser has been on the Tidewater faculty for 10 years. Tidewater officials declined further comment.

In court records and testimony at a bond hearing Friday, according to reports in The Virginian-Pilot and other local newspapers, prosecutors and the Virginia State Police laid out what appeared to be a well-documented scheme to kill Kimberly Perez, who also teaches information systems technology at Tidewater’s Norfolk campus. According to the college’s Web site, the two have collaborated on courses on how to use Blackboard, among other things.

As described by prosecutors, Glosser feared that the sexual harassment complaint could damage his career. “Because he was concerned for his job, he was going to have her killed,” The Virginian-Pilot quoted the prosecutor, David Laird, as saying in court on Friday.

According to police officials, Glosser asked a friend and former neighbor, Raymond Groves, for help in trying to either persuade Perez to drop the complaint or to “take her out.” Glosser allegedly offered Groves as much as $4,000 if the complaint disappeared and up to $15,000 if Perez did, according to the testimony of police officials.

Prosecutors said that Groves solicited a third man, F. Devin Scott, to be the conduit to Perez. According to police, Scott made threatening telephone calls to Perez, who hired a private investigator and eventually contacted the Virginia State Police.

They then set up a sting that resulted in Scott’s arrest. That set off a chain of taped telephone conversations, first between Scott and Groves, and then between Groves and Glosser, in which the men implicated themselves, police officials said. Laird, the prosecutor, told The Virginian-Pilot that the evidence against the men was “very strong” because of the taped conversations.

Neither Glosser nor his lawyer responded to e-mail messages and telephone calls left for them over the weekend. Perez also did not respond to messages.

Tidewater Community College officials said they were cooperating with the police and that they might take “further action” against Glosser as “additional information on the charges and evidence becomes available.”

— Doug Lederman

http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/06/12/murder

Can women be sexual harassers? The gender double-standard in confronting sexual abuse and harassment

October 26th, 2006 by: Ceara

BBC, United Kingdom- After politely but firmly refusing the advances of customer Elizabeth Sykes, 38-year-old Mike (McPherson) became the target of an harassment campaign.

“I had to explain to her, ‘Look I’ve got a young family, I’ve got a position and a job that I would never compromise,’ but it just spurred her on.”

After insisting they had been having an affair in which he had betrayed and beaten her, Elizabeth would tail Mike’s car on his journey to and from work, driving erratically to ensure she secured his attention.

“I feared for Mike’s safety as he was driving to and from work,” remembers Mike’s wife Karen. “Sometimes I was quite frightened to come in the house really.”

There is a lot of talk about sexual harassment right now, and it’s a very skewed discussion.  If you read much of what is written, or listen to the discussion, the problem is presented as one of violence against women, and a problem perpetuated exclusively by men.  I keep pointing my finger at feminists for this, but truthfully, violence and abuse by women is something that we have not wanted to confront as a society.  It has always seemed to be taboo.

One of the rationales for ignoring sexual harassment and abuse by women are myths about women and violence, and the fallacy that they are less violent than men, if at all.  While this myth is not really new, it is now largely perpetuated by feminists.  (Okay, I’m finger pointing again. grin)  In fact, the current research shows that women are far more likely than men to respond to situations with violence. This myth also manifests in attitudes about sexual harassment and abuse, with a common belief that women do not engage in these behaviors, or if they do, it does not cause any harm.

Historically, there has been a fear of woman as being aggressively sexual, so women have always been viewed as asexual. This was/is probably to placate men’s own fears because their hormones can cause men to feel women have so much power over them. The “good girls don’t” image probably created a feeling of security that their wives would not succumb to suitors, or be unfaithful, when their husbands were not with around. It was also meant to create an idealized view of women as good and moral role models for raising children. I vaguely remember reading something about the church using this image to encourage women to always say “no” to sex outside of marriage and for anything other than procreation, which acted as a kind of birth control, helped keep men in line, and helped keep society “moral.” Because of this image, women were viewed as the “moral compass” of society outside of the church. (gag) Any woman who did not embody this asexuality, was branded a “slut” or a “scarlet woman,” and this pressure often exists even today.

Seattle - Christina Orozco was charged with felony stalking for harassing and stalking a former female co-worker. Orozco was sentenced to 10 months in jail for posting a Web site and sending harassing e-mails to her former co-worker’s children. In the website, Orozco accused her coworker of being a sex offender. In the letters she sent the children, she asked “What does it feel to be f**cking your mother…?” Orozco also mailed a series of fliers about her coworker to friends, co-workers, supervisors, the co-worker’s son, her boyfriend and her neighbors.

The two women had seen each other socially for a few months, until the victim became uncomfortable with the friendship and began to limit contact. Orozco became more aggressive as the victim attempted to develop her relationship with her boyfriend. (See the video on this case)

Women too passive and powerless to abuse???

Feminist scholars say women rarely sexually harass because it requires power to abuse, and women have never been in positions of power. This really isn’t true at all, women have only been limited as to where they had any power to abuse, but they have always had the opportunities. For one thing, women have always found power in groups. The primary limit has been in the area of abuse targets, and limitations on women have historically narrowed this to two possibilities–other females and children.

One-of-the-gang sexual harassment by women has been around forever.  It is an old story, the group of females who gang up on other females to bitchily evaluate their appearance or anatomy. Or the girl or woman who is popular with the males, and is branded a “slut,” and generally slandered with rumors being spread about her promiscuity by jealous females. And women have been guilty of street harassment probably as long as the behavior has been around. (I had a boyfriend once who got catcalls from women just about everywhere he went, and he always found it degrading.)  If men do these things, feminists call it objectification, oppression, discrimination, sexual harassment, or gender harassment, etc.  If women do it, well, we may say they are being “objective”, particularly if they are targeting other women, but mostly we don’t call it anything. 

Traditionally, women’s roles kept them at home, raising the kids, and the pressure to seem outwardly “non-aggressive” even amongst other females has probably led women to target children the most. The privacy of the household, and ease of disguising sexual and physical abuse as “normal childcare,” along with society’s tendency to dismiss women’s violence, and dismiss children’s rights, has kept this sad truth out of the media. Also, feminist scholars tendency to blame men for all abuse in society has greatly clouded the facts of the problem. One male survivor, Scott Abraham, writes very poignantly about this issue in Yes, Women Do Abuse. While the media and feminist scholars continually point their fingers at men when it comes to the issue of child abuse, it is a fact that women are responsible for the majority of child abuse cases, which also includes sexually abusive behavior. And truthfully, the number one cause of unnatural child mortality (read: murder) is abuse by mothers. (If forced to acknowledge this fact, feminists will soundly lay the blame on male oppression for causing women to engage in abusive behavior—a major cop out.) .

Feminism steps in and makes everything better–NOT

The feminist and sexual “revolutions” have changed a lot. Women are now in the workplace significantly more than they are in the kitchen, and they are stepping into positions of power in their fields. Women are learning that “good girls do,” and are trying to be freer sexually, and for some this means the freedom to be as sexually aggressive as men have been in the past. Indeed, despite their complaints about male behavior, feminism has led women to adopt many male models of behavior, and they are not being very discerning when it comes to what qualities they try to embody. Because of this, increasingly we are hearing stories of women sexually harassing or stalking men and other women. This is even being reflected in the media with advertisements showing women’s empowerment reflected in the female employer patting a male subordinate’s rear-end or objectifying men in some way, or music videos that glorify street harassment by women (Salt ‘Peppa’s Shoop)–all rather sick and misguided attempts at showing that we’ve “come a long way, baby.”  (Women have also empowered their way to perpetrating the majority of workplace bullying abuses, internationally, with the majority of their targets being other women.) 

Where in any of the writings of the founding feminists does it say that freedom and equality of the sexes means freedom for women to behave as despicably as some men?

Five OPD Drug Agents Suing City Over Sexual Harassment

ORLANDO, Fla. — Five male undercover drug agents from the Orlando Police Department are suing the city over allegations they were sexually harassed by their female supervisor.

Some claim that Sgt. Barbara Jones groped them and made inappropriate comments.

The five officers say Sgt. Jones has been accused of this kind of thing before, and that she should not have been put in charge of their mostly-male drug unit.

She denies almost all of their accusations. She admits to hugging the officers, calling it a ‘lifetime habit.’ ….For those things, she received a written censure and that was it….

However, the undercover drug agents accuse Sgt. Jones of sexually groping them. They claim that she would grab them in the groin area while hugging them. They say it got to the point where they were covering themselves for protection. They also say she sat on their laps and made inappropriate sexual comments. “

Common harassment and abuse methods of woman

Because of continued pressures to seem sexually passive or asexual, women will most often use subtler methods for harassment and abuse than men. For example, masking groping as “hugs” as in the story above, or even going so far as to rationalize sexual abuse as “love.” The Counselor Helper tactics would be the most common modus operandi for women, as this would capitalize on their tendency to nurture even in professional environments. This type of harasser tries to create a parental or mentor-like relationship with a target. They pretend to be mothering, trying to help, but the real goal is sexual exploitation. They will abuse with a smile. This is one of the most common tactics for abusive female educators, and we are hearing story after story in the media of female teachers sexually harassing and abusing their students. Masking sexual intentions towards someone with pretenses to help and support are the most secretive and the most predatory of all harassment techniques. I also think they are the most damaging; the stories I’m hearing at the SHSF attest to this.

Stalking is also a favorite tactic of abusive women probably because it so often involves “relational aggression” a common method for women abusers to destroy the relationships of their victims, thus isolating them and giving the abuser more control. Women’s capacity to manipulate relationships make them very effective stalkers, and stalking is also easily masked as concern and a sincere desire to help which are classic approaches of the Counselor-Helper sexual harasser. Read Women Who Stalk, Rosemary Purcell

However, the power in numbers dynamic make One-of-the-Gang tactics a favorite choice of girls and women who harass. Also, research shows girls more likely to use verbal sexual harassment, which can go hand-in-hand with the group dynamics of One-of-the-Gang. Just read Aaron’s story in the SHS Stories and Experiences area for an example of this.

There is also sexual harassment by women that is disguised as a political agenda. Increasingly, women are embracing a traditional male model of sexual aggression as a way of showing their new found liberation and sexual empowerment. However, this is also leading them to sexually harass and abuse.  We call them “Statement Maker” harassers.

Nine Former Workers File Sexual Harassment Charges Against Women’s Shelter

Minneapolis Star Tribune - Eight women and one man were fired from a North Mankato (MN) women’s shelter because (allegedly) they refused to fit into the sexually charged atmosphere created by a few staff members.

The complaint (filed by the MN Human Rights Department) noted that this involved staffers, not shelter clients but one allegation involved an announcement over the office PA “saying that she was going to take a survey on how many times staff members had sex with their partners”. …

In a (Mankato) Free Press story a board member contended that the former employees were too traditional and not interested enough in advancing feminism.”

Then there is the issue of enabling harassers–that is, women who support, and collude with, male or female harassers in the retaliation against sexual harassment targets who complain about the abuses. This is very, very common and often the result of not only internalized sexism, but also a very sick and twisted jealousy over the sexual attention being paid to the victim. Often these retaliation behaviors involve further sexual harassment of the victim, and some women may participate in these with relish.

For more on types of harassment and abuse, see our article about sexual harasser methods and patterns

The Gender Double Standard in Sexual Abuse and Harassment

What is worse, because of the belief that women do not harass or abuse, no one is holding women accountable for it. Even if a woman is caught red-handed or confesses, so often little if anything happens to them. They are simply not held accountable to the same degree that male harassers are. The best example of this is the way sexual abuse of students is handled: if a man is convicted of statutory rape of a student, he will get 25 years in prison; if a woman is convicted of statutory rape, she will get probation, or at worst, a few months in jail. It took multiple times in front of a judge for Mary Kay Le Tourneau to go to jail; no judge would ever give a man “three strikes” for the same behavior.

Forty-three-year-old Pamela Diehl-Moore pleaded guilty to having sex with a child – a 13-year-old male student who had just completed 7th grade. Of the incredible outcome to this case, David Kupelian, author of “What’s behind today’s epidemic of teacher-student sex?” sums things up pretty well:

“(She) now stood before a Hackensack, N.J., judge awaiting sentencing. And what would that sentence be? Considering all the intense media coverage of male sexual predators victimizing female children, one might expect a stiff prison term, accompanied by a withering rebuke.

But when New Jersey Superior Court Judge Bruce A. Gaeta opened his mouth, the words that came out did not express criticism of the teacher, nor acknowledge any damage she had done to her victim.

’I really don’t see the harm that was done here,” the judge proclaimed, “and certainly society doesn’t need to be worried. I do not believe she is a sexual predator. It’s just something between two people that clicked beyond the teacher-student relationship.’”

Pamela got 5 years probation.

Of responses to female stalkers, Rosemary Purcell writes:

“In our experience, those who find themselves the victim of a female stalker often confront indifference and skepticism from law enforcement and other helping agencies. Not infrequently, male victims allege that their complaints have been trivialized or dismissed, some victims being told that they should be “flattered” by all the attention….Victimization studies indicate that women are seldom prosecuted for stalking offenses, with criminal justice intervention most likely to proceed in those cases involving a male suspect accused of stalking a woman. The available evidence suggests that stalking by women has yet to be afforded the degree of seriousness attached to harassment perpetrated by men. This is despite any empirical evidence that women are any less intrusive or persistent in their stalking or pose any less of a threat (physical or otherwise) to their victims.

In my own situation, my former university has known for quite awhile about the female professor who has been stalking me, and they have done little to stop it, or make amends for the extensive damage she has done. (I cannot take a restraining order out on her because in my state, the stalker must have threatened you with physical harm first.) When Aaron complained of sexual harassment by his female coworkers, he was laughed at by his supervisor. When Logen complained of the lesbian who was harassing her, she was demoted.  The Vons Companies Supermarket chain fired a man after he complained of chronic sexual harassment by female supervisors. (See story) These stories are not unique.

I think this is the old image of female sexual passivity at work. If a woman is viewed as an asexual being, or not capable of violence, then she couldn’t possibly be doing anyone any damage if she sexually exploits or abuses them. Sexual harassment or abuse by people viewed as asexual couldn’t even be called abuse, could it? If it were a male professor stalking me, he would most certainly have been fired, or at the very least, suspended, demoted, or sent on a leave-of-absence, ages ago. On women who sexually harass and abuse children, Scott Abraham writes,

The message is simple and exclusive, and pervades virtually all literature about childhood sexual abuse. Whether overt or covert, direct or indirect, a survivor molested by women who looks for confirmation of the horror, for an authority who can offer acknowledgement, is going to find denial. This inability to confront the reality of women’s violence comes from more than just an idealization, of course….There was no mutilation of my body when my mother forced her five year old son to perform cunnilingus. Damage to the soul the law cannot identify, measure or quantify.

It is ludicrous to use the image of the abuser as measure for the extent of the damage that can be done to an abuse victim, but this is exactly what happens when sexual abuse and harassment by women is evaluated. Because women are viewed as asexual, or sexually passive, any abusive or exploitive behaviors they engage in are dismissed as harmless. But the damage caused by a sexually abusive male is not the result of his being male. Most of the damage from sexual abuse and harassment is psychological, and is the result of the boundary violations, and the objectification and degradation of the victim–none of which are contingent on the gender of the harasser OR the victim.

I am sure that feminists will continue in their denial about abuse by women–some call it simply a “paradox” in their theories–but the nature of women has always included tendencies for violence and abuse, including sexual violence and abuse. These are not instincts that exist only in males, women have them, too, and many have acted on them, and do act on them. While social limitations in the past narrowed the field in terms of where women could abuse, who, and how, this has always occurred. Now that women are more ubiquitous in the world—meaning the have more options and are not so limited in methods and possible targets, we are hearing more stories of their violence, sexual harassment, and other forms of abuse. Yes, men are more likely to engage in sexually exploitative behaviors, but this does not let women off the hook. And women who do engage in these behaviors inflict just as much damage as the males who engage in the same abuses.

It is a sad fact that some women seem to think that equality means having the same power and opportunities to focus on fulfilling their personal needs regardless of the expense or damage to others, and the freedom to chose to behave as despicably as some men. But true equality is much bigger than this and carries with it a far greater responsibility. True equality goes far beyond equal opportunity in all things; it means being held to the same standards of behavior in all areas, regardless of your gender. This is not a responsibility simply for individuals, it is the responsibility that institutions should hold all accountable who break the law, not simply the men.

Revisiting “North Country”

October 16th, 2006 by: Ceara

North Country

As this is the inaugural post of the new blog, (grin), it seemed most fitting to open things up with some comments about North Country, since many people are still somewhat abuzz about this since it opened last fall. I first saw the film during its opening weekend, but couldn’t really cough up anything particularly insightful about it at the time because the entire film left me so, well choked up. But it’s been close to a year now, and since the DVD release, and several more viewings, the story is a lot less triggering, even if it is still so very close to home.

I first heard about the movie when someone from the Warner Brothers publicity department contacted me about using the SHS site to help promote the movie. Many promises of items, posters, and free passes were dangled as incentives—“how about if we hold a poster drawing for all the SHS members!!!–none of which were ever delivered, but this was never a motivation for writing an article about the case, anyway. I’d heard about Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. from a National Public Radio spot they did on the book which the movie is “inspired” by, “Class Action: The Case That Changed Sexual Harassment Law.” The book, which was a real page-turner, along with a number of articles and interviews provided much good information for the article, and I’ll always be grateful for being given the incentive to learn about these remarkable women who sacrificed so much to make things better for other workers.

This is probably my only qualm with the film. As bad as things were depicted in the movie, the reality was much, much worse, and went on for a lot longer. It doesn’t really show the severity of the harassment, or how long the women endured it.  (And they leave out completely that Lois was stalked by one of her supervisors.) Nor does it show the true extent of the brutal treatment of the plaintiffs that went on in the courtrooms. From the time of her initial complaints filed with the Minnesota Human Rights Department, to the final decision by the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, 14 years had passed. Plus, the Hollywoody-happy-ending is a very misleading as the lives of the women involved was irreparably changed for the worse, even though they won the case. Several of them, Lois Jenson included, were so damaged by post-traumatic stress disorder that they never worked again. The settlement was very modest. No one got “rich,” and strained relationships were not rosy, as the last scenes in the movie try to imply. (Although, Lois Jenson was signed to the “speakers circuit” this past year, so hopefully things are looking up for her.)

Ok, so much for my rant on filmmakers’ needs to sift the truth so that it fits into a 100-minute time frame, with an uplifting boost at the end.

That is was the first class action sexual harassment case is landmark because this had never been done before. There have been a number of cases since. In 1998, Mitsubishi’s agreement to pay $34 million is the biggest sexual-harassment settlement ever obtained by the U.S. government. Other cases have also followed J v. E: Long Prairie Meat-Packing (1st male-on-male class action) Astra USA, First Asset Management, General Motors, etc.

However, Jenson v. Eveleth Taconite Co. was also important in several other ways (which the movie’s sifting did not allow to be highlighted.) One of which involves the “discovery process” in litigation. This process is the pre-trial phase in a lawsuit during which each party can request documents and other evidence from other parties, or produce evidence by using a subpoena or through other discovery devices, such as requests for production and depositions During Jenson v. Eveleth, the plaintiffs suffered grueling depositions that “explored” their personal and sexual lives in such a way that one woman compared to a “rape. This was a common practice in sexual harassment cases, and still is to a certain degree—hence the popularity of the “nuts and sluts” approach by defendant’s lawyers. But the 8th Circuit Court’s decision strongly criticized the tactics of Eveleth’s lawyers, and this criticism has set a precedent that limits such tactics in subsequent suits. Still, this does not always affect the behavior of those who want to discredit a victim—companies or individuals may try to gain as much negative information about a complainant that they can as part of retaliation or backlash, despite what the law says. (If they can’t find it, they may try to manufacture it.) But thankfully, there are now some constraints within the court system.

Another important precedent was the court’s acknowledging that the treatment of sexual harassment plaintiffs during the litigation process can, in of itself, cause psychological damage and that this should be factored into damages awards if they win a suit.

I really don’t know how many times I’ve seen North Country now, or the documentary in the “Special Features” section of the DVD. (Check this out to hear about the other women who were right alongside Jenson throughout.) It’s not an “artistic” work, full of layers to explore and uncover. It’s just a straightforward story, so multiple views reveal no new surprises. But it’s so much like my own sexual harassment experience that it’s become an exercise in strength just to get to the end. Frankly, since that first viewing the movie theatre, I don’t think I’ve been able to sit through the film in its entirety, not once. I seem to only be able to stop and start the DVD, watching in bits and pieces over a day or two. And I always skip over the rape scene. I’m not sure what getting through the whole thing in one sitting again will prove to me, but it will prove something. (One woman posted in the “Open Discussion” at SHSF that she would not have been able to get through the book if she didn’t already know the women won the case.)

In the meantime, when I start up the DVD again, I’m always working towards one point in the film. It’s the final courtroom scene when that pale, frightened girl becomes the first to join the case and to help make it a class action. There is something about the actor’s expression of disbelief as she stands up that really resonates for me. Even before she stands up, she so obviously cannot believe she is about to do it. I think that this tiny bit of film is hugely symbolic of why the women in the true-life story were so amazing. The actor’s expression in that scene may be the only hint in the film as to the enormity of the sacrifice the women made to see that things were better for the rest of us. They were not special women, they were very ordinary, and they felt scared and alone. But they took on this huge task anyway, not out of revenge or the desire for profit, but because it was the right thing to do.

May we all find the courage to “stand up” for others as these women did, at least to some degree. What a world this would be we could.

If anyone has an Mp3 of the title song, I’d sure appreciate a copy. (grin)

To read more stories of sexual harassment => CLICK HERE