Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Harassment Law and Supposed Sexual Harassment Scandal Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    This is apparently the current law on harrassment:

    Under the Equality Act 2010, harassment is unwanted conduct which is related to one of the following: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation and is therefore unlawful.

    http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864

    I think this part seems ridiculous you can't just go banning things because people don't want them. You should be precisely defining whats acceptable and whats not not simply what is unwanted.

    You could potentially define it as unwanted conduct if you applied the word repeated to it because how are you supposed to know whats unwanted until you have done it or asked for it even(apparently even asking about things is being considered harassment)?

    I think this discussion is very important considering the recent events where Parliament seems to have gone crazy over some MPs doing practically nothing with one MP simply sexting a young woman and having cups of coffee with them and now this is unacceptable harassment, even though from the law above it has to be unwanted, and another person has potentially flirted with someone by calling them sugar tits,I say potentially because it was in a discussion of Gavin and Stacey so may have not been the context, and told them to buy sex toys and we are now supposed to believe that this is harassment. Arguably, the last revelation might be a waste of the secretaries time though.

    I think society seems to have gone antisex mad and is trying to act as if sexual interactions don't exist. We are heading for a society where you will have to be ultra careful about everything you say and do as it could then be unwanted and be a harassment and don't dare ask anyone out or flirt with them because that is now sexual harassment. Noone will be able to end up in a relationship because it would be too dangerous to try.

    Its not at all wrong to look for a partner in the workplace either. Read the following articles below:
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/surpri...16-2?r=US&IR=T
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...y-reveals.html

    I'd advise people to simply mention that you aren't interested or you are not happy with that remark if you feel you have been offended or if there has been a sexual advance that was unwanted if the remarks/comments become persistent only then should it be sexual harassment and should then be reported because as the above articles show sexual advances in the workplace seems to be a sensible location for them.

    However, there have been some allegations of groping which if were true would be unacceptable so there may be something to this supposed scandal but the whole thing seems to have been blown out of proportions to me. I think this whole thing is cheapening the suffering of victims that do actually suffer sexual harassment and assault.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    (Original post by Dalek1099)
    This is apparently the current law on harrassment:

    Under the Equality Act 2010, harassment is unwanted conduct which is related to one of the following: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation and is therefore unlawful.

    http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864

    I think this part seems ridiculous you can't just go banning things because people don't want them. You should be precisely defining whats acceptable and whats not not simply what is unwanted.

    You could potentially define it as unwanted conduct if you applied the word repeated to it because how are you supposed to know whats unwanted until you have done it or asked for it even(apparently even asking about things is being considered harassment)?

    I think this discussion is very important considering the recent events where Parliament seems to have gone crazy over some MPs doing practically nothing with one MP simply sexting a young woman and having cups of coffee with them and now this is unacceptable harassment, even though from the law above it has to be unwanted, and another person has potentially flirted with someone by calling them sugar tits,I say potentially because it was in a discussion of Gavin and Stacey so may have not been the context, and told them to buy sex toys and we are now supposed to believe that this is harassment. Arguably, the last revelation might be a waste of the secretaries time though.

    I think society seems to have gone antisex mad and is trying to act as if sexual interactions don't exist. We are heading for a society where you will have to be ultra careful about everything you say and do as it could then be unwanted and be a harassment and don't dare ask anyone out or flirt with them because that is now sexual harassment. Noone will be able to end up in a relationship because it would be too dangerous to try.

    Its not at all wrong to look for a partner in the workplace either. Read the following articles below:
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/surpri...16-2?r=US&IR=T
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...y-reveals.html

    I'd advise people to simply mention that you aren't interested or you are not happy with that remark if you feel you have been offended or if there has been a sexual advance that was unwanted if the remarks/comments become persistent only then should it be sexual harassment and should then be reported because as the above articles show sexual advances in the workplace seems to be a sensible location for them.

    However, there have been some allegations of groping which if were true would be unacceptable so there may be something to this supposed scandal but the whole thing seems to have been blown out of proportions to me. I think this whole thing is cheapening the suffering of victims that do actually suffer sexual harassment and assault.
    Maybe you could help yourself if you bothered to look at the actual law , then state the full version and not a simplified one. You might then stand a better chance of not looking silly.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Hate to agree with tigger, but section 26(2) of EA 2010 specifies "unwanted conduct" of "a sexual nature" will be prohibited where, through intention or effect, it violates the dignity of the person or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for that person.

    But it was very nice to see you write such a lengthy post off this fundamental misapprehension of the law. Remember, kids, just because someone is confident and assertive in their opinion does not mean they know jack **** about the topic.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dalek1099)
    Under the Equality Act 2010, harassment is unwanted conduct which is related to one of the following: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation and is therefore unlawful.

    http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864

    I think this part seems ridiculous you can't just go banning things because people don't want them.
    Let's put it this way. I put it to you to define some form of behaviour that you feel is acceptable but that some liberal leftie would deem as inappropriate? And bear in mind that this is within a professional or business type environment. Here are some examples I can think of:

    Touching friendly or otherwise - in a business setting, other than a handshake or other formal gesture, why on earth do you need to touch someone.

    Use of language of a sexual nature - why is that required in a business or work environment?

    Sexist, racist or derogatory comments - again, in a business setting, what purpose could that language have? You wouldn't expect a teacher or doctor to use such language yet somehow in a business environment it is deemed acceptable by some.

    So go on - what behaviour is falling foul of the law?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    The problem with the law on harassment in the workplace and the EqA is that it's subjective to the point of view of the complainant, and the best that the person being complained against can hope for is that the ET (or court depending on where its gone) weighs the reasonableness of the conduct having the harassing effect.

    Essentially, the way the statute is drafted - if you believe you are being harassed - then you are, but it might not be reasonable for the conduct to have that effect.

    So if A comes into the office singing a well known Justin Bieber song, and B believes this to be harassing behaviour - on the face of it, there is no measure or test as to what is or isn't harassment, and the perception of B is pretty much all that matters. The adjudicator then takes into account the circumstances of the case and how reasonable it is that singing the song might be harassment on the grounds of characteristics x, y or z.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dalek1099)
    This is apparently the current law on harrassment:

    Under the Equality Act 2010, harassment is unwanted conduct which is related to one of the following: age, disability, gender reassignment, race, religion or belief, sex and sexual orientation and is therefore unlawful.

    http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1864

    I think this part seems ridiculous you can't just go banning things because people don't want them. You should be precisely defining whats acceptable and whats not not simply what is unwanted.

    You could potentially define it as unwanted conduct if you applied the word repeated to it because how are you supposed to know whats unwanted until you have done it or asked for it even(apparently even asking about things is being considered harassment)?

    I think this discussion is very important considering the recent events where Parliament seems to have gone crazy over some MPs doing practically nothing with one MP simply sexting a young woman and having cups of coffee with them and now this is unacceptable harassment, even though from the law above it has to be unwanted, and another person has potentially flirted with someone by calling them sugar tits,I say potentially because it was in a discussion of Gavin and Stacey so may have not been the context, and told them to buy sex toys and we are now supposed to believe that this is harassment. Arguably, the last revelation might be a waste of the secretaries time though.

    I think society seems to have gone antisex mad and is trying to act as if sexual interactions don't exist. We are heading for a society where you will have to be ultra careful about everything you say and do as it could then be unwanted and be a harassment and don't dare ask anyone out or flirt with them because that is now sexual harassment. Noone will be able to end up in a relationship because it would be too dangerous to try.

    Its not at all wrong to look for a partner in the workplace either. Read the following articles below:
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/surpri...16-2?r=US&IR=T
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/ar...y-reveals.html

    I'd advise people to simply mention that you aren't interested or you are not happy with that remark if you feel you have been offended or if there has been a sexual advance that was unwanted if the remarks/comments become persistent only then should it be sexual harassment and should then be reported because as the above articles show sexual advances in the workplace seems to be a sensible location for them.

    However, there have been some allegations of groping which if were true would be unacceptable so there may be something to this supposed scandal but the whole thing seems to have been blown out of proportions to me. I think this whole thing is cheapening the suffering of victims that do actually suffer sexual harassment and assault.
    People are barking mad these days - they take offence at saying something that might have impacted a slave three hundred years ago. Hence you don’t know what’s mass hysteria and what’s real anymore.

    And these insane people just go on repeating mass-hysteria like you can’t say man or women as it Might offend transgenders (even though it doesn’t) because they are trying to fit it. So you don’t know what to believe.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.