Sexual harrassment college campuses
On the meta-level, the same publications pushed the narrative that men can’t possibly understand sexual harassment, or men will never believe accusers’ stories, or men refuse to believe other men can be harassers.The Guardian writes about Men Who Are Silent After #Me Too, and the Washington Post about how Some Men Disagree About What Counts As Sexual Harassment.The obvious explanation for gender differences in harassment has always been that men constitute 80% of sexual harassers for the same reason they constitute 83% of arsonists, 81% of car thieves, and 85% of burglars.Since most men are straight, most victims are women; when the men happen to be gay, they victimize men.I requested a geographic posting to get away from that lunatic and get an investigation underway but I was told by my WO that “these things happen for a reason”. It was pretty uncomfortable and I felt kinda vulnerable.Eight months later I was suicidal and that WO was signing my counselling and probation with her husband. In the wake of all these sexual harassment stories, I looked back on this moment and considered for the first time that that was actual sexual harassment. Don’t believe random Redditors, but do believe random bloggers?Having silenced or ignored all men who might be sexually harassed, the media proceeded to treat sexual harassment in the most gendered way humanly possible, constantly reinforcing that only men can do it and only women can suffer it.The Guardian, being commendably honest about its priorities: We Must Challenge All Men About Sexual Harassment.
Yes, the stats show that they disagree exactly as much as the men do – but who cares?
Needless to say, every line of evidence we have shows men are less likely to report harassment that happens to them than women are. I mean, for one thing, we’re telling people to stop using the phrase “pregnant mothers” since sometimes transgender men get pregnant.
It seems kind of contradictory to think of this as a pressing issue, but also think that the fact that only 30% of harassment victims are men means that we should always use female pronouns for generic harassment victims, and always generically call perpetrators “males in position of power”. Suppose I write about how we need to do more to support the victims of terrorism. But what if I write about how we need to do more to support the Christian victims of Muslim terrorism? If I write story after story about how Christians need to be on the watch out for Muslim terrorists, but Muslims need to be on the watch out for other Muslims being terrorists, and if I tell Muslim victims of Christian terrorism to stay silent because that’s not “structural oppression” – then that “maybe” turns to “obviously”.
I had a chief harass me daily which resulted in administrative actions when I tried resisting her abuse.
My introduction to her was when she was telling the 20 or so people “Under her” that her dildos name is George…it went downhill from there and eventually she was groping me on the daily.
The “it only matters if it’s structural” game isn’t so much fun now, is it?