JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION

LuminousArc's past comments

• 

  0

  LuminousArcApr. 05, 2009 - 07:21AM JST

  Wow. If people actually believed this stuff, there wouldn't be offices to work at anymore. I don't know if this writer just doesn't have a good enough grasp of English to be writing this article, but this is flat out horrible:

  "What is sexual harassment then, and how can you identify it? Harassment is unwelcome behavior that makes the other person (or people) feel uncomfortable. It makes no difference whether it’s intentional or not, since it is the victim or subject of these unwanted attentions, that judges if the conduct is offensive and unwelcome or not."

  Absolute rubbish. Let's get an ACTUAL definition from the National Women's Law Center:

  "Sexual harassment is unwelcome behavior that happens to workers because of their sex. Frequently, the fact that it's sexual is a clear sign that, but for her (or his) sex, a worker would not have been targeted.

  It includes:

  * Unwelcome sexual advances 
  * Requests for sexual favors, or  
  * Verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature 
  
   When:
  
  * Submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as the basis for employment decisions or is made a condition of employment (quid pro quo  harassment, or harassment resulting in a tangible employment action), or  
  * Such conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive that it creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment (hostile environment  harassment). 
  

  Sexual harassment may or may not involve any physical contact, and words alone may be enough to constitute either type of harassment."

  Notice how every single instance of what sexual harassment constitutes explicitly includes the word "sexual".

  And for Azrael who just doesn't seem like accepting what is patently the truth, here's the same breakdown of what constitutes sexual harassment translated from Japanese law:

  "What is Sexual Harrassment?

  Sexual harassment is where by words or actions another party is made to feel sexual dislike or disgrace and in many cases becomes a problem in the place of employment or in business relations. In most cases this involves words or actions by a male against a female.

  There are criminal laws against some of this activity, depending on what happens and the seriousness of the offense, such as indecency (Criminal Code Article 176), extortion (Criminal Code Article 223), or defamation (Criminal Code Article 230) and there are also laws against stalking...

  VARIETIES OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT

  ---Male employees show nude pictures on computers to female employees they do not like ---Re-employed female workers are pressured for sexual relations from the company president and if they refuse, they are fired. ---Male managers during work hours feel out female employee body parts. ---Female employees are invited out on dates by superiors, forcing the females to take long leaves from the company."

  Both the National Women's Law Center and Japanese code of law make a distinct point of separating discrimination from harassment, probably because they're two entirely different things.

  This completely undermines the author's other completely absurd contention that:

  "What people tend to miss, however, is that the definition of 'sexual' in 'sexual harassment' means both 'sexual' and 'sex' as in 'gender.'"

  It absolutely, unequivocally, and inarguably DOES NOT. It means sexual, as in SEXUAL, and THAT IS IT.

  There's a whole different set of laws and regulations for gender discrimination, which LFRAgain has pointed out. It's absolutely absurd to me that someone would think to lump the two things together. Claire is absolutely NOT sexually harassed in the example mentioned above. She's a victim of discrimination and sexism. It's a horrible thing to do, it's a horrible waste of human capital. It is absolutely NOT sexual harassment.

  This is a very poorly written article. If the author wants their point to actually get across, they shouldn't have massive incorrect oversights like this in the terminology department.

  Posted in: Dealing with sexual harassment in the workplace

• 

  0

  LuminousArcAug. 22, 2008 - 10:22AM JST

  boobug: Yes, but it took them three chances to finally do it. Flawed system in my opinion.

  Just curious, were you complaining about the system being flawed, in your opinion, when the 6-3 US team beat the 8-0 Japanese team in Sydney 2000 to win gold?

  I didn't hear any complaints then. Why complain now?

  Posted in: US softball team loses gold to Japan

Follow us