Social Wall Street Rule for the #MeToo Era: Avoid Women at All Cost

[TheComebackKid]

I already did answer the question itt. And since you're such a terrible poster there is no reason to take you seriously, so goofing on you it is.

Running and dodging like a woman. Carry on

 

[nostradumbass]

Sounds like a pretty natural response to #believeallwomen. It's unfortunate that sensible women are the ones who lose out the most but that is what it takes to get rid of the vindictive loonies. You're never going to get everyone on earth to behave exactly how you want them to, so just get rid of everything and see if that's the world you want to live in. Kick out comedians for being "offensive", have women mae consent videos for sex, avoid 1 on 1 meetings with women and treat attractive women like nobody is attracted to them at all. If you look at a lot of these feminists, you can tell the target of their anger was always attractive women in the first place.

 

[TheComebackKid]

There is a reason cultures through out history have regulated interactions with women so extensively. It protects women from assault and abuse and protects men from rumors of impropriety.

Women have advanced themselves right back into the "stoneage" where they aren't allowed to do or participate in certain things simply for being women.

 

[drstrangelov]

I’ve got about 10 female employees directly reporting to me, and I rarely hold closed door 1 on 1 meetings, never meet 1 on 1 outside the office at all with any of them and generally never sit near any coworkers on flights if I can help it. I’m not going to sexually harass my staff, but I’m also not going to allow that kind of accusation to appear plausible if I need to fire one or otherwise discipline any of them.

I treat my male staff the same way, though.

 

[kpt018]

Running and dodging like a woman. Carry on

You have to see the irony in using "running and dodging like a woman" as an insult. Your attitude (and others like you) is the fucking problem.

 

[panamaican]

Wow. I am surprised you would say that. Basically the allegation is that he followed up and looked at where the tattoo terminated at the edge of her sleeve of her gown which was on her shoulder.

Even if it was light flirting that HAS TO BE ok. It is not OK if she likes it and wrong if she does not.

That's not the allegation. The allegation is that he traced the tattoo even under the edge of her clothing with his finger.

I would definitely grab the dudes arm, twist and follow the tattoo if I thought it interest. Touch it and point out areas i liked.

I would never let some random dude physically trace anything on my body without my permission. That shit is a true boundaries violation. Ask, get permission first.

But I will take it even further, again. Even if he was lightly flirting, trying to be engaging and potentially sexual that is OK. It has to be OK. It is not OK if she likes it and wrong if she does not.

Yeah, it is. That's the whole point of understanding boundaries and what consensual behavior means. That whether or not something is OK is based on the people and the context involved. I let my boys talk shit at the bar because we're cool. I don't let my boys talk shit in a professional setting, even though we're still cool. I don't let someone else talk shit at the bar, even though it's cool if my boys do it.

Trying to be engaging doesn't require that we also try to be potentially sexual. Every married person understands the difference if they want to stay married.

Humans flirt. Flirting HAS TO BE ok. Women EXPECT men to flirt when they are in to them.

No, flirting doesn't have to OK in every situation. Think through what you're saying. If flirting is always ok - is it okay to flirt while you're married? Do you want your lawyer flirting with opposing counsel in court? Flirting with the judge in court? Does it matter if the judge does not like that shit - do you turn to your attorney and say "no big deal"?

People have the self-discipline to pick and choose WHEN they flirt.

My entire problem with this movement is that it seems that abuse is being defined as any unwanted attention a woman does not want when she considers it after the fact.

Look I am not talking about grabbing a girls ass or boobs, but small incidental contacts are absolutely part of flirting. A girl reaching across and touching your hand or arm during a discussion whether you asked for it or not, can be her intent to break the touch barrier which is a big way to advance flirting. She is not WRONG if you have no interest in her and right if you do. We cannot define things by that measure.

The measure HAS TO BE, to allow mild but mostly unobtrusive flirtations (which I don't even think Neil was doing here) and to judge the man (or woman) after the fact by how they react to any stated or even perceived lack of interest to the flirting.

More people meet, date and marry in work environments that in any other. All the ones who date and marry cannot be right and all the ones who don't wrong. We cannot use 'results based thinking' to judge the men. It is a terrible logical fallacy to judge by.

Why would this woman with the tattoos' not consider the fact that 'maybe he meant nothing by it even if it creeped my out and therefore I won't metoo him which will jeopardize his job'. It is beyond bizarre that she feels so aggrieved that she is ok to risk his career and i guess if somehow she could learn later that is absolutely was a innocent gesture on his part she would 'geez i am sorry then'.

This is a clear abuse of metoo and what is destroying the movement imo. Every gal that thinks 'hmmm that might have been creepy' is not a victim, especially if the guy did nothing to follow up or push in after.

Listen, I can debate this all day but it really boils down a very simple principle. Our actions are always subject to the interpretation of those we interact with. Regardless of our intent, how others perceive those actions matters.

To swing legal for a minute:

Battery - an unwanted touching. That's the basic definition pretty much everywhere. It does not matter why Person A touched Person B. It matters if Person B wanted the touching. Now compare that your earlier concern about flirting being OK sometimes and not OK other times. Battery, a centuries old legal concept, uses the exact same reasoning. Whether or not something is OK turns on how the recipient felt about it in that singular circumstance. It doesn't matter that they were fine with it yesterday, it doesn't matter if they were fine with it from one person and not another. In that singular moment - did they want to be touched by that other person?

Trespass - intentionally entering someone's property without permission. It doesn't matter why you entered the property. It matters if they agreed to let you do it. Entering someone's yard to get your ball. Okay with permission. Criminal without permission.

Theft - taking someone's property without permission. Take someone's ball from their yard. Okay with permission. Criminal without permission.

Over and over again, the criminal code tells us that an important difference between allowed and disallowed behavior is if you received permission before you acted.

 

[cincymma79]

Yes, I've read the Tyson tattoo incident. I've read what he says and I've read what she alleges. Look at the woman who alleges that he finger traced her tattoo under the edge of her clothes. If that happened, it's an obvious overstep on his part.

But let's say he didn't over trace the tattoo he just touched it to some degree. Would you do that to a male colleague? He's got just some random tribal tat on his bicep, it looks cool so you finger-trace it?

To me, it seems pretty simple. If you wouldn't do it to a male colleague without it being weird, you shouldn't do it to a female colleague. How many of us go to dinner with our male friends and put our hands on their legs, arms, put our arms around their waists, etc. Comment on how fit they're keeping, how their suit fits them well, etc. We don't because that shit is creepy when you say it to your boys so don't say it to women at work either.

I would tell the guys I work with terrible jokes. I don’t the women. So already treating them different there and this still counts as harassment. So we’re off to a bad start for the treat them the same argument. In general I just avoid them except for fucntions where I have to include them. If I have to edit my behavior around someone I don’t have any interest in being around them. Simple.

Also by excluding them from outside work interaction it reduces their access to things that can make them preferable to work with and that can affect their ladder climbing later

 

[panamaican]

This is a good rule and it's the one I adopted years ago, but are some of your examples perhaps a bit overboard? I've made comments about fitness, how their suit looks tailored/fits them well, etc, to male colleagues. Touching, outside of a handshake, high five, or fist bump is off limits, but the other things seem rather acceptable to me.

The examples are big to illustrate the point. Sometimes small examples with too much nuance make the big principles hard to grasp because people get lost in the details.

 

[panamaican]

Also by excluding them from outside work interaction it reduces their access to things that can make them preferable to work with and that can affect their ladder climbing later

So? I never said that's a bad thing. I think it's pretty sad that some guys don't know how to engage women without making the environment uncomfortable for the women. But I don't think any guy should be obligated to spend non-work time with women colleagues just because they're women.

If a guy tells off-color jokes in his spare time then he should limit his non-work social time to people who will enjoy said humor and avoid people who won't - male or female. Now, he shouldn't sit in the boardroom of a mandatory corporate meeting and tell said jokes. And he shouldn't shout them across the workspace to his buddy.

But, at the bar, after work on his own time. Go ahead and tell people who don't like it that they should probably hang out with someone else.

 

[nac386]

Yes, I've read the Tyson tattoo incident. I've read what he says and I've read what she alleges. Look at the woman who alleges that he finger traced her tattoo under the edge of her clothes. If that happened, it's an obvious overstep on his part.

But let's say he didn't over trace the tattoo he just touched it to some degree. Would you do that to a male colleague? He's got just some random tribal tat on his bicep, it looks cool so you finger-trace it?

To me, it seems pretty simple. If you wouldn't do it to a male colleague without it being weird, you shouldn't do it to a female colleague. How many of us go to dinner with our male friends and put our hands on their legs, arms, put our arms around their waists, etc. Comment on how fit they're keeping, how their suit fits them well, etc. We don't because that shit is creepy when you say it to your boys so don't say it to women at work either.

Just quoting this to make sure everyone read it. I think you made some good points here (that should be obvious to everyone).

 

[cincymma79]

So? I never said that's a bad thing. I think it's pretty sad that some guys don't know how to engage women without making the environment uncomfortable for the women. But I don't think any guy should be obligated to spend non-work time with women colleagues just because they're women.

If a guy tells off-color jokes in his spare time then he should limit his non-work social time to people who will enjoy said humor and avoid people who won't - male or female. Now, he shouldn't sit in the boardroom of a mandatory corporate meeting and tell said jokes. And he shouldn't shout them across the workspace to his buddy.

But, at the bar, after work on his own time. Go ahead and tell people who don't like it that they should probably hang out with someone else.

How about just at work causally between people or at lunch? Same concept. I don’t touch people because thats weird but women do. I get it all the time.

 

[MikeMcMann]

And it might succeed because youll get the white knights like @kpt018 backing it. It is really alarming how sone men are backing this "woman don't make things up" line of thinking that enables this hysteria. The only reason metoo is a thing is because its being pushed by men like kpt and pan who think and act like women.

The movement has legitimacy even if it has swung too far.

Where the movement fails is when it becomes a way for a woman to damage or end a guys career because a guy potentially flirted and she found it undesirable.

Again even if we assume Neil was in full on flirt mode with this girl, which does not appear to be the case as she does not cite any attempts by him to advance or follow up, it is not wrong for him to engage in light flirting using her solar system tattoo (one of his interests) as his basis. IN fact that is a perfect opening to break the touch barrier which is an important flirtation step.

But she saw he did that one incidental contact while looking at and talking about her tattoo (so he could just be having a nerd moment) and then he did nothing to try and follow up and/or push it to the next level.

At that point she should move on. Even if she has lingering doubts of 'was that creepy?. Was he flirting?' Or it would be fair for her to say to him 'hey that made me feel uncomfortable' to which he should stated 'that was not my intention but I apologize if you felt that way'.

But what SHOULD NOT HAPPEN is for her to go to his boss or the media and metoo him over it when she herself acknowledges it might have been innocent. My god, that is the case where you must give the benefit of the doubt. Feeling creeped out, in and of itself, is not the problem.

It is how the guy reacts on ce informed that matters.

 

[panamaican]

How about just at work causally between people or at lunch? Same concept. I don’t touch people because thats weird but women do. I get it all the time.

If you're sitting with just people you know and keeping the volume at your level where it won't disturb others? I can't see the problem. If you're telling said jokes loud enough that everyone can hear them then there might be a problem.

As for touching people, if a guy doesn't want a woman touching him - he should say so.

I've been in my share of situations where women (and gay men) at work get a little too touchy feely. It can be uncomfortable. The knowing looks and jokes from colleagues can also be uncomfortable. I've certainly avoided women who didn't seem to get the hint but I didn't want to cause waves with a big production (gay guys tend to move on without too much fuss). As I got older, I became more adept at ending such exchanges early. But in my late teens and early twenties, it wasn't that easy. That might be why I'm more sympathetic.

 

[cincymma79]

If you're sitting with just people you know and keeping the volume at your level where it won't disturb others? I can't see the problem. If you're telling said jokes loud enough that everyone can hear them then there might be a problem.

As for touching people, if a guy doesn't want a woman touching him - he should say so.

I've been in my share of situations where women (and gay men) at work get a little too touchy feely. It can be uncomfortable. The knowing looks and jokes from colleagues can also be uncomfortable. I've certainly avoided women who didn't seem to get the hint but I didn't want to cause waves with a big production (gay guys tend to move on without too much fuss). As I got older, I became more adept at ending such exchanges early. But in my late teens and early twenties, it wasn't that easy. That might be why I'm more sympathetic.

Never used to give it a second thought but now it’s hard to know where the line is when they cross it for you

But again I’m excluding people already

 

[panamaican]

Never used to give it a second thought but now it’s hard to know where the line is when they cross it for you

But again I’m excluding people already

It's a personal line. That part is not hard. It only becomes hard if you're trying to gauge your line by some other social standard - like whether or not it's bad for the company, what will it do to that co-worker.

 

[MikeMcMann]

If you feel so strongly why don't you explain why? I am not familiar with NDT's incident.

Basically a woman approached Neil for a photo Op in 2009. She was an astronomy buff and had a tattoo of the solar system that started on her arm and went up to her shoulder.

Neil says he had a geek moment and wanted to see the tattoo and how well they did it and if pluto was there so while holding her arm in both hands he followed the tattoo up her arm and to where it terminated on her shoulder. She was wearing a shirtless dress (I think the report says) but had a small strap at the shoulder covering the end of the tattoo. He either just peered under that strap or moved it (don't know) so he could see it.

none of that seems to be in dispute.

She says she felt it was kind of creepy at the time, as his eyes traced up her arm to her shoulder along with whatever contact he was making in holding her arm.

I maintain whether or not it was just an innocent geek moment like Neil says or even some light intentional flirting neither is wrong and certainly not metoo worthy where a guy can lose his job and career over inappropriate actions.

If it was an innocent geek moment and his sole focus was the tattoo, which seems to be the case as he did not try to follow up or flirt with her in any way after, then metoo'ing him is terrible.

If it was a light flirtation, and it creeped her out that too is ok. Guys are allowed and expected to flirt. Not every woman will appreciate it. And at other times they will. What is expected is that if the woman gives any indication that it is not desired, the guy apologize and back off, and if not, THEN he gets metoo'd.

But the very act of 'oh he flirted and I did not like or want it' should not be a metoo'able offense.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You do think like women. Even in this thread you simultaneously acknowledge that women falsely accuse men but then turn around and tell me to "just don't be creepy" and they have nothing to worry about. Like a woman typically does you are saying two different, irreconcilable things and not making any sense. A person could lose their mind trying to reason with ya.

Yes. Some guys are awkward. Some guys are creepy. But they too get to try and flirt and find a sole mate and they sometimes do despite being awkward and creepy.

We cannot establish a bar that only smooth, handsome, and really social adept guys get to flirt as that leaves me and only a few others in that advantageous position.


But far too many women seem to think unwanted attention from a man should never happen as if each guy has the ability to know in advance whether the attention was wanted or not.

 

[kpt018]

Basically a woman approached Neil for a photo Op in 2009. She was an astronomy buff and had a tattoo of the solar system that started on her arm and went up to her shoulder.

Neil says he had a geek moment and wanted to see the tattoo and how well they did it and if pluto was there so while holding her arm in both hands he followed the tattoo up her arm and to where it terminated on her shoulder. She was wearing a shirtless dress (I think the report says) but had a small strap at the shoulder covering the end of the tattoo. He either just peered under that strap or moved it (don't know) so he could see it.

none of that seems to be in dispute.

She says she felt it was kind of creepy at the time, as his eyes traced up her arm to her shoulder along with whatever contact he was making in holding her arm.

I maintain whether or not it was just an innocent geek moment like Neil says or even some light intentional flirting neither is wrong and certainly not metoo worthy where a guy can lose his job and career over inappropriate actions.

If it was an innocent geek moment and his sole focus was the tattoo, which seems to be the case as he did not try to follow up or flirt with her in any way after, then metoo'ing him is terrible.

If it was a light flirtation, and it creeped her out that too is ok. Guys are allowed and expected to flirt. Not every woman will appreciate it. And at other times they will. What is expected is that if the woman gives any indication that it is not desired, the guy apologize and back off, and if not, THEN he gets metoo'd.

But the very act of 'oh he flirted and I did not like or want it' should not be a metoo'able offense.

Ok, but that falls under what I said (and @panamaican seems to have fully addressed this).

It is entirely inappropriate to do this to a co-worker or an employee without explicit permission. "Don't be creepy" includes don't tough here or lift her clothing to see underneath.

I don't have an opinion on NDT but for the work place it's inappropriate.

 

[cincymma79]

It's a personal line. That part is not hard. It only becomes hard if you're trying to gauge your line by some other social standard - like whether or not it's bad for the company, what will it do to that co-worker.

That’s my line vs what’s acceptable to others that see it

 

[panamaican]

That’s my line vs what’s acceptable to others that see it

It's not "your line" vs. "what's acceptable to others."

It's "your line" vs. "the consequences of enforcing your line."