The DJs case wrote fear into the rule book for young men

Moggy says:

12:16pm | 25/10/10

Eric….I am a 63 year old woman who as a young woman was appalled by a lot of the men I had to work with. I was a young virgin Christian. One of my bosses used to arrive at the pharmacy I was working in, when all the other staff had left for the day to do the last shift & I was his assistant.  When there were no customers about he’d start grilling me about my sex life, & because I was engaged he presumed that my fiance & I were intimate. We weren’t!  I ignored him at first which made him even more crude.  Some of the things he said to me were absolutely disgusting & I had to resign to get away from it. Some of my bosses were really nice & never mentioned anything sexual, but there were many who never shut up about sex. The boss I have cited above asked me one day “How are things between your legs? A bit fishy?” That’s when I resigned.  There was no one I could turn to to get justice because it was men who held all the power in those days. Now Eric you may think this was really funny, but believe me when a woman has no interest in a man his constant suggestiveness is revolting & sometimes frightening. It’s degrading & as I see it childish to constantly be going on & on & on about the joy stick between your legs!! And now that women have somewhere to turn to when this happens to them, men don’t like it. Well too bad…..there’s a hell of a lot more to life than sex!!

JulesG says:

02:01pm | 25/10/10

Moggy: I’m so sorry to hear about your experience and no one should be subject to that sort of abuse, especially when there is no avenue for restitution or justice. I am merely saying in my posts further on in this blog that the pendulum has swung to far the other way and we still do not have equality

iansand says:

02:27pm | 25/10/10

JulesG - You mean that the pendulum has swung to the point that women do not have to tolerate unwelcome advances from workmates?  That is an outrage!!!

Moggy says:

02:46pm | 25/10/10

Jules believe me the pendulum has hardly moved. As recently as 12 years ago (I was 51!) I was harassed by a company managing director & when I acted as if I wasn’t interested, because I wasn’t, by ignoring his advances I was sacked because “my position no longer existed,” even though a man took my place doing the exactly same work. Then there was the incident years previously when a visiting client made advances towards me & when I refused he went to my boss & told him that I was harassing HIM for sex which he found insulting & therefore wasn’t interested in doing business with my boss anymore. I got sacked yet again & had nowhere to turn. There are thousands of women out there who had no place to turn to in these instances & we were constantly harrased for sex, had to listen to men’s filthy jokes & disgusting comments about women’s bodies, & I know of one girl, a single woman, who had her boss turn up at her flat at eleven o’clock at night wanting sex.  The boss didn’t know that her brother had moved in with her & when he heard his sisters distress the brother came running to her aid.  And guess what?? The boss called the police & claimed he’d been assaulted.  The woman was sacked. But the case of assault was dismissed.  O happy day!!  I am glad all this is coming out into the open. It’s been going on for far too long to all women, and not just the women with model looks, but ordinary women, like me.. My sisters daughter, who is a lawyer, was sexually harrassed by one of the partners where she worked & after complaing, she was blamed for “leading him on” & ended up losing her job. She asked for an unfair dismiassl payout & this was rejected until she threatened to go public. Just like me, all these females were of nice, but average looks, with average bodies & we found the constant suggestiveness of some of the men we worked with, particularly the bosses,  intimidating & stressful. And NO the pendulum hasn’t even arrived at equality yet.

Tim says:

03:05pm | 25/10/10

Moggy says:
“as recently as 12 years ago”

recent? that’s a joke right?

impossible says:

03:07pm | 25/10/10

Moggy are you for real?  This all sounds too much.  I haven’t encountered anything like what you’re describing for a long time, and I’m a lot younger than you are.  Your personal experiences sound terrible, however they are not worth $850K, just like this case in question isn’t worth $850.  Maybe an harrassment case is worth that much if the complainant is threatened with the sack, there is 50% unemployment, she/he is virtually without skills, he/she has a army of kids to feed and hence has to sell one’s body effectively to put food on the table.  Kirsty has many years to go before retirement and at her $70K salary her $500K nett payout will be all but gone within 7 years (excluding superannuation).  Silly move to go to the media and milk it for all it’s worth.

Moggy says:

03:17pm | 25/10/10

Yes Tim, that’s how slow the pendulum is swinging!!!!!

Farmer says:

03:42pm | 25/10/10

Oh dear! What a difficult thing it is to be employed, Moggy. Thank goodness we don’t ALL suffer the way you do. Is there a pattern emerging here?

Randal says:

04:01pm | 25/10/10

Oh Molly I the pendulum has swung and its come back with the reading of what a load of made up bollocks!

Tim says:

04:05pm | 25/10/10

Moggy,
you sound like past experiences have jaded your perceptions of the current attitudes to this behaviour.
I’m a lot younger than you and haven’t seen any of this behaviour in any of the workplaces i’ve been in.
In fact most of the men I work with are extremely careful with what they say to the female employees just in case. Office banter between sexes is now nearly non-existent.
With respect to your examples, remember there’s always three sides to every story: his, hers and the truth.

Eric says:

04:16pm | 25/10/10

Methinks Moggy protests too much.

For every case of genuine sexual harassment, there is a case of false accusation.

Moggy says:

04:28pm | 25/10/10

@Impossible Says: All this started for me over 46 years ago & believe me it’s for real. It was spread out over the years.  I know things are improving a lot now but what happened to my niece was as recent as five years ago.  It has to be stopped because it not only humiliates the victim, it causes problems at work & can lead to depression . As I say in my second blog it wasn’t always men at work, but clients who were sexually harrassing not only me but other women as well.  I came from a quiet country town to work in the city as an 18 year old & I cannot begin to describe how I felt by this unwanted attention because in my home town nothing like that had ever happened to me, neither had I heard of it happening to other women apart from a traffic cop who used to offer to not book a female driver if she’d get into the back of the car with him. (This was a huge joke in our town because this cop was an ugly, obese man & the people in town used to joke that he’d never be able to fit into the back of a car with anybody anyhow!) I lost trust in my bosses in the end & when I finally got a good job with a company & found that the boss was gay, I was ecstatic.  I stayed with that company for ten years, then retired recently. But I have to say, isn’t it great that we are able to share opinions etc this way & in a free country. It makes me glad to be alive.  I think that the claim in the DJ case was designed to frighten the living crap outof bosses male or female who think it’s their right to ask empoyees for sex. And I think the final pay-out was far too much.  It would have been far more appropriate if it was in the $50,000 area.  Cheers!

Woza says:

04:59pm | 25/10/10

Without knowing Moggys exact situation I get the feeling that a well placed ‘F**K OFF!” probably would work wonders most of the time.  Women so often seem to think that guys will take the hint but it would all be much easier for everyone involved if women learnt how to say ‘No’

Moggy says:

06:14pm | 25/10/10

@Eric, you would be horrified if you knew how many of these cases of sexual harrassment in the workplace are never reported. In my case there was simply nobody to report it to.  And just talking with the younger females in my family it’s still going unreported because they don’t want to lose their jobs simply because they weren’t believed.  The percentage of men who sexually harrass wormen at work is very small, I would think. But when one is working with in a large company with a lot of staff these sort of men crawl out of the woodwork. As I said in another answer it would be an unjustice if all men were blamed for this because in most cases men who work with women are well mannered. But there ARE neanderthals out there who think they’re God’s gift to women.  Furthermore I believe the final payout to the DJ victim is still grossly over priced. Surely something closer to $50,000 would have been more appropriate.

Tom says:

02:36am | 26/10/10

If you’re going to sue, you go after the bloke with the deepest pockets.

So yeah, the rules may have changed for CEOs of multi-million-dollar department store chains - although I reckon these guys have probably known for a while that sexually harassing staff is not very clever - but for normal working schleps, this case is not the seismic game-changer you’re talking it up to be. One reason - women aren’t going to bother suing me or my employer because there’s not enough money in it.

Gonzo says:

01:28pm | 26/10/10

Moggy, were you harassed at 51??!! Give me a break… Do you work at an aged care facility or what? Was there anybody else that could’ve been harassed other than a 51 year old lady? or were you the only one allowing it?

BK says:

08:16am | 25/10/10

We have all seen male co-workers flirt with female co-workers long after she acts disinterested and eventually they end up together (for a while). Maybe Bec has been that woman, maybe not. This behavior will never change while nice guys finish last.

Tim says:

10:24am | 25/10/10

What a load of bollocks.
For every serial harrasser in a workplace there will be someone like Kristy Fraser-Kirk.
And they are both in the extreme minority.
All this case has done has ensured people suffering serious harrassment will be less likely to make complaints and the majority of men will be extremely cautious around their female co-workers.
No one wins.

Austin 3:16 says:

01:28pm | 25/10/10

So is mild sexual harassment ok ?

Rossco says:

03:36pm | 25/10/10

no, but is it worth $800,000? rape victims dont ever see anywhere near that amount in compensation payouts yet the deed is a millionth degreee worse.

Max Vaunted says:

11:33am | 25/10/10

He sez, she sez Anne. Stand up for your rights by all means, but sue for millions? It’s wrong wrong wrong.

Melrusk says:

12:16pm | 25/10/10

Max I believe you missed the point, the case was about dealing with an entrenched culture of ‘shut up & put up if you know what is good for you’  Would you suggest to your mother or sister that it was OK for her boss to physically handle her when she clearly did not want him to?

Markus says:

01:01pm | 25/10/10

Melrusk from what has been reported, he was fired within 5 weeks of her finally reporting his behaviour. That seems like fairly a prompt response of ‘we will not tolerate this behaviour’.
To then go for $37 million, on the basis that this action suggests an entrenched culture within DJs, makes a mockery of serious harassment cases.

Melrusk says:

01:56pm | 25/10/10

Markus I believe he actually resigned to reduce the impact. At which point he also managed to leave the country avoiding media scrutiny. The $37 million was just the going rate of I think it is 5% of the company profit.This would be really a reflection on who he was working for not the actual indecent.

Eric says:

04:28pm | 25/10/10

Uh, Melrusk, there was no such entrenched culture. McInnes was forced to resign, and the woman was offered compensation to the tune of $600,000.

Natalie says:

05:00pm | 25/10/10

Max Vaunted… he resigned with a payout of over $2 million for his trouble! He GOT PAID to “resign” after sexually harrassing a female member of staff, on multiple occasions.

How is that OK?

Melrusk says:

07:59pm | 25/10/10

‘FORMER David Jones chief executive Mark McInnes has lashed out at the possible addition of 16 more complainants to a $37 million sexual harassment claim against himself and David Jones.’
From:The Daily Telegraph August 30, 2010 2:14PM
Hhmm could be perceived as a culture of harassment not sure how many are required to constitute a culture.
“I offered my resignation to David Jones because I had behaved in a manner unbecoming of a chief executive officer - I made mistakes and I have acknowledged those mistakes,” he said in a statement today.
The Australian August 04, 2010 4:58PM
Uh Eric I guess it is all in the interpretation.

stephen says:

10:57am | 25/10/10

I like to ask, don’t any of these harrassed girls have boyfriends ?
I’m talking here about the jealous type. You know, the ones that, when hearing that their Jan, Deb or Di get a proposition, then get another and another, and jealous Jeff or Pete gets on the blower and gives a warning, or even takes a stroll to the office to catch this varmint in the act ? No jealous borfriends, huh ?
Hmmm.
All this derring-do must be takin place in Paddington.

TheRealDave says:

02:27pm | 25/10/10

Bingo Stevo.

If my missus comes home and says one of her bosses, hell - any bloke, is hitting on her and won’t back off and I’ll be on his office doorstep the next morning for a ‘chat’. Any bloke who stands aside while his missus is being harassed is a dead set dog.

What was Kristy’s boyfriend doing? Spending all window shopping for Jet Ski’s and HSV’s ??

iansand says:

08:58am | 25/10/10

Are you sure that the whistle or the leer were appreciated by the woman?  If not (and anecdotal evidence suggests that they are not) how do you justify that unwelcome attention?

Babs says:

11:55am | 25/10/10

Speaking as one of the many recipients of the constant male attentions you write of I can assure you I always did my best to cross the street if I approached a building site, just so I could escape the whistling and cat-calling. Like me, most of my friends hated the relentless scrutiny of men. It made even walking down the street feel as though we were under a spotlight.  Thankfully it all stopped when we got older. These days girls don’t have to endure so much unwanted commentary about their looks, figures etc, a situation I would have loved when a shy teenager and young woman.

Austin 3:16 says:

04:07pm | 25/10/10

The Good Old Days Weren’t Always Good, And Tomorrow Ain’t As Bad As It Seems.

bec says:

08:15am | 25/10/10

Yes, and when you tell them, you’re called a bitch, or accused of being full of yourself. Even when you tell some people something directly, they refuse to listen, or ascribe your reaction to hysteria or overresponding, because they lack the empathy and skills to understand why people don’t want to be with them.

Some non-verbal cues are really bloody obvious - clearly distasteful facial expressions, moving away quickly and obviously, leaving conversations abruptly.

Zeta says:

08:35am | 25/10/10

It’s social darwinism at work - socially skilled, emotionally attuned men successfully breed and pass on their traits while awkward mouth breathers die alone.

ibast says:

09:18am | 25/10/10

I think you are right Steve.  Some women will believe they have given off all the right negative symbols, but in reality their tendency towards politeness will override.  Unless the behavior is repeated and the man (or women) has been clearly notified, then sexual harassment should not apply.

iansand says:

09:40am | 25/10/10

ibast - How do you tell the CEO to fuck off and still have a job tomorrow morning?

ibast says:

09:48am | 25/10/10

iansand, the law protects you pretty well here.  Also I’m not sure what the result of this mindset is.  The women should just put up with it?  The man should be subject to sexual harassment when he thought his advances were being well received?

iansand says:

10:08am | 25/10/10

ibast - THe result of the mindset is identifying the fatuity of this contribution - “Unless the behavior is repeated and the man (or women) has been clearly notified, then sexual harassment should not apply. “.

Oh.  That was you.

Miss Doubt says:

10:13am | 25/10/10

Nice theory Zeta but it doesn’t cut it in practice.  The Darwinism that does occur operates on levels other than social sensitivity (e,g prospects power physicality popularity).  The selection mechanism usually being to firstly play it cool, to measure ones worth by how hard the suitor will try.  Success then comes to those with another p-word; “persistence”.

Plenty of smart women end up with your so called “mouth breathers” while nice guys are still coming last.

ibast says:

10:28am | 25/10/10

iansand, Are you saying that a man should be subject to a sexual harassment suite for a single incident or even repeated incidents where no protest was given?  That would be very unreasonable.

iansand says:

10:44am | 25/10/10

ibast - Are you saying that a man should not be subject to an assault charge for a single incident or even repeated incidents unless a protest was made?  That would be very unreasonable.

It is pretty clear that blokes thing this is a trivial problem.  The problem there is that a lot of women don’t.

Bobster says:

11:04am | 25/10/10

@ Bec,

Probably taking it a bit far - that’s essentially saying anyone with aspergers is pretty well screwed.

The Civet says:

11:50am | 25/10/10

I’ve always believed that calling a man by the wrong name works a treat in the turn-off stakes. Gaze at the guy as if your very life depends on him; then as soon as he opens his mouth say “But thanks for your advice Sam”. Is loathsome to a bloke called Neil.

ibast says:

12:05pm | 25/10/10

iansand,  harassment does not equal assault.  Harassment could be as trivial as asking someone out to drinks, but only if it is repeated after it has been made clear the approach is unwanted.  For harassment to have occurred (as apposed to assault) it needs to be both repeated and clearly unwanted.  Assault (be is sexual or otherwise) is clearly a different case, is a criminal matter and is not what this case (or this article) is about.

LizzyLou says:

12:33pm | 25/10/10

What the heck are you doing making advances or comments (either welcome or otherwise) at work?? Is this what you’re paid to do? Are men incapable of working with women and valuing them as people? Would you treat your male colleagues the same way?

iansand says:

01:31pm | 25/10/10

ibast - Would you care to elucidate that?  It is much simpler to assume that all forms of unwelcome attention are ... unwelcome.

ibast says:

01:37pm | 25/10/10

The problem is the possibility of knee-jerk reactions from companies that may start to introduce “no fraternization” rules.  You do the majority of your socialisation at work and there should be no reason why two adults shouldn’t be able to form a relationship should they so wish.  We never got to see the facts in this case.  We only got to see one side of the story and there never was a court ruling on it.  Despite this I fear that an undesirable precedence may have been set.

Bek says:

01:25am | 26/10/10

@ibast:
Do you know that the Australian military has a ‘no fraternization’ policy?  Did you know that the Australian Public Service frowns upon it?  How about Coles and Woolies - they’re very careful where partners / family members are placed - for good reason.

You’re right - with the amount of time you spend at work, its quite natural to form friendships with those people, and sometimes these develop into relationships.  In fact, I met my husband while we were both serving members of the Navy…  However, we were not allowed to work together.

Your premise, however, doesn’t work.  We’re talking harassment - unwanted, unwelcome behaviour - and its usually repeated, and long term. There are different factors in reporting this kind of behaviour - peer - to peer harrassment is not as intimidating to report - but harassment by someone in a position of power would be.  Regardless of job protection laws, being that you supposedly can’t be sacked as a result of putting in a complaint, or by refusing advances - but seriously - you haven’t seen or heard of a case where this has been circumvented? You can’t see how easy it is/would be? (Even in the military!?)
So your response to a woman in a similar position is to carry a miniature video camera (007 style) after the first rejection, in case it happened again?
Oh, and most cases I’ve seen, the claimant HAS verbally indicated their disinterest - but because you can’t exactly tell your boss to F off (especially in the military!) - the attempt to be as diplomatic with the rejection is often taken to be a challenge - that with persistence, she (and in a couple of cases, he) would come around…
Its not a clear cut situation. 
What I’d like to see is more definition on what constitutes harassment more equally informed.  Take Moggy above - crude jokes / sex talk in the workplace she found offensive.  Thats ok, its not for everyone.  Personally, I don’t mind.  I have been a party to many such ‘inappropriate’ conversations in my time, and I’m known for the fact that none of my male colleagues have managed to offend me with what things they can say… Funnily enough, I am known by my husband to be quite prudish at times…  Its called knowing your audience, and knowing when its ok to be silly, and when enough is enough.  I’m sure most people wouldn’t have an issue with this.  By the same token, I would expect that if someone found something offensive, or received unwanted attention, that they make sure they’re clear about finding it so.  I would also like a little common sense applied to the reporting of incidents.  If you receive unwanted attention from your boss, report it to someone else, even if you don’t take it further - to have someone else know about it (specifics too, please!) - and seriously - if its someone making ‘inappropriate’ jokes / conversations, is it realistic to try someone for a first offence, especially if you’re new?  By all means, if it happens again, after you’ve told them, go for it - but seriously - especially nowadays where just about everything is taboo to talk about - everyone is going to be offended by something.  The trick is to try to be cognizant of who you’re with, and act accordingly.

InkyV says:

09:53am | 25/10/10

So you don’t support sexual harrassment but you wouldn’t employ someone who might complain if it did happened? Not quite sure what you mean there. Why do you see Fraser-Kirk as taking her second shot rather than being the victim of harrassment twice? No one is asking you to ‘act like an unemotional robot’ - just be professional. Act like an employee. It’s a workplace, not a singles bar.

Eric says:

12:18pm | 25/10/10

InkyV, you seem to assume that all allegations of sexual harassment are true. In fact, many are false - and when a successful case can land hundreds of thousands of dollars, there is a lot of incentive to lie.

AjinDarwin says:

02:27pm | 25/10/10

Reply to InkyV (here since his post doesnt have a reply option) I think you are missing the point that this woman may be an opportunistic claimant clearly used to pursuing this line of fortune seeking more often that the average female population member or indeed even as much as her looks would warrant.

Moggy says:

03:14pm | 25/10/10

Bruce I was sexually harassed in all of my jobs (6) & am now retired.  I am an ordinary looking woman with a bubbly personality. I was sexually harassed in every job. Four were bosses or other employees, & two were clients. I rejected them politely but still had to put up with the filthy jokes & constant sexual suggestiveness.  One boss used to be sarcastic towards me because I constantly refused his advances. He used to call me Miss Prissy before telling another filthy joke. And of course the male workers would shriek with laughter & adored him. I’m glad that my daughter is not treated like this in the workplace because her boss makes ALL his employees read & sign a statement of work ethics which includes banning sexual harassment & dirty jokes.

InkyV says:

04:10pm | 25/10/10

Eric and AjinDarwin: I certainly acknowledge that some women exaggerate or lie about claims of sexual harrassment and I agree that it’s opportunistic and wrong. In fact, it’s criminal. Maybe I’m being naive but why would DJs settle if they could have gone to court and proven Fraser-Kirk had made it all up? And imagine the attendant media coverage that would have supported DJs and McInnes. There must have been some truth to her claims.

Missed Out says:

06:45am | 26/10/10

InkyV it takes two to settle
Funny how we see the opposite sides of the same coin.  I was thinking why did she settle for mere 800K less her costs if she had a decent case.  Wasn’t it supposed to be about not letting him get away with it , courage and principles and getting punitive awards to give to charity?  I read this as her case being weak.

andy says:

05:23pm | 25/10/10

Some of you people are children, seriously. Its not about magic rules like that, its about not being a twat. I have lots of good relationships with girls at my office and am facebook friends with some of them. The trick is, I am not a moron.

Miss Doubt says:

10:40am | 25/10/10

Nice one Neil, this is definitely the elephant in the workplace. Maybe you could add a fourth though,

4. Don’t later spurn the object of your attention

Just to be safe

Susan says:

10:45am | 25/10/10

Sorry Neil, your theory has more holes in it than my spaghetti strainer. Mark McInnes is physically quite attractive (IMHO) and he has just be involved in quite a significant sexual harassment case.  His role as CEO of DJ’s made him a powerful man which many people also find attractive.

Jason says:

12:18pm | 25/10/10

Yes, well I guess he breached rule no. 4 then.

bec says:

04:10pm | 25/10/10

A former harasser of mine was perfectly good looking. It’s just that it was still unwanted. So I suppose that drills holes in your stupid rules?

Joseph says:

08:07pm | 25/10/10

Being attractive is more than just looks. Women should know this as they judge men on far more than the physical.

You know what his point is:
Its not harrassment if his attentions are desired.

How is a man meant to know its wanted before he has a crack?  Advanced social skills including empathy and perception that many men do not posess. Women on the whole will not verbalise their distaste in a man’s interest at work and would rather let things escalate before reporting him for harrassment.

Because of this many men will just not take the risk of flirting at work. That’s it. The one major spot for partner shopping is now out of bounds.

Tom says:

04:05pm | 26/10/10

Rule No 1: Don’t harass.

It’s wrong.

KH says:

10:05am | 25/10/10

I would hardly ‘celebrate’ having a future of popping out some kids, spending most of my time in the home, and being forced to stay in a marriage even if there is no feeling or worse, abuse.  Either that or have limited career options - nursing, teaching or some kind of domestic.  Oh yeah, I can see why you would be nostalgic for such times.

InkyV says:

10:10am | 25/10/10

The marginalisation of men? Are you serious? And your claim that women have ‘all the legal, sexual,social and consumer power’ is spurious at best. Women don’t want men to become ‘frightened, cowering impregnators’. We just want to get on with our jobs without someone grabbing at our bra straps and sending inappropriate sex texts. If that makes us monsters, so be it.

Richard says:

11:09am | 25/10/10

JulesG is speaking the mind of a vast number of underempowered men InkyV, and it sounds so alien to your oh-so-priveliged feminist mindset that you straight out refuse to comprehend it, but let me spell this out to you: The male empowerment movement will be the dominant social phenomenon of the next decade. We will take back our power and our rights that have been eroded over the last 50 years of entrenchment of feminist ideals. We are men, and our angry roar is beginning to sound out, all you feminists are now on notice, your days of bossing us around are coming to an end.

Tim says:

11:37am | 25/10/10

InkyV,
I’d say the problem is that some women want to be able to engage in those same behaviours (sex texts, office flirting etc), while at the same time retaining the right to claim harrassment at any future point in time if they feel like it.

JulesG says:

01:08pm | 25/10/10

KH: I was referring to celebrating the real and concrete differences between men and women, not their roles as you seem to refer. Men are just as limited when we are pigeon holed into our male roles (for the record, I am a house husband and my female partner goes out to work). Men and women think and behave totally differently as a group and it is this that should be celebrated and utilised for its richness and the common good. Instead, we’ve got this situation that the differences between us have to be expunged and minimised into a homogeneous, sexless society of, ‘them and us’ and political correctness. If the victim in this story had been male it wouldn’t even make the news or be taken seriously, let alone warrant this obscene payout. The polarisation that this story highlights, is just another nail in the coffin of maleness. Yes, I’m nostalgic for the time when men were allowed to be men and women were allowed to be women and we really were all treated equally and valued for our different attributes and skills we could give.

Melrusk says:

02:29pm | 25/10/10

Jules you make the comment that the pendulum has swung too far the other way. This I am afraid is the problem. Men it would appear believe that women speaking out in a case of harassment is some threat to them. In reality this is better for every one. Men will be clearly more aware of what is & what is not acceptable behavior. Women may appear to be gaining more ground in equality yet we still earn @ 60% of our male co-workers, we still out number men by a staggering number when it comes to victims of harassment or assault. We still have less chance of winning such a case and therefore are far less likely to ever proceed with such a case. So as far as legal, sexual, social power this is simply not true.

InkyV says:

03:54pm | 25/10/10

Tim: I couldn’t agree more. It has to work both ways.
Richard: Having the mindset that women and men should share the same rights is not a privilege. All I want you to spell out for me is how women hold all the legal, sexual, social and consumer power. It’s not that I refuse to understand it. I wracked my brain for examples of how women hold all the power and I couldn’t come up with any. I’m not trying to be provocative. I seriously don’t know what power you’re taking back.
PS I’m not a chest-beating femi-nazi but thanks for the notice anyway.

Joseph says:

08:20pm | 25/10/10

InkyV, if you’re genuine about a desire to learn why men think this is so, then I suggest you read the ‘Myth of Male Power’ by Warren Farrell.

It outlines how men are locked into their roles just as women were pre 1950’s. Certain burden’s are still expected of men if they wish to be considered men in this society. There is some resentment from men that we still have to shoulder our burden’s while women are putting down theirs.

Warren’s other books are very informative and clearly spell out some of the issues that frustrate men about gender roles in society. His works aren’t mysoginistic and he has a genuine desire to mend gender relations. Try looking him up on wikipedia as a start.

Melrusk says:

09:40pm | 25/10/10

@ Joseph if you are looking for a balance to that you could perhaps read “The End of Equality” by Anne Summers. As a politcal adviser 92-93 and Officer of the Order of Australia, she has a rather insightful perspective on gender equality issues. I hope you will find this also informative.

Chris L says:

02:03pm | 25/10/10

Strueth Mark! I guess you and Joan could twist anything into a political football. Why aren’t you two in politics?

Steph says:

06:58am | 26/10/10

Working from home because of a faster internet? Tell that to the tradies. Even people computer-bound at work can’t necessarily work from home because, like for my husband, they need inter-office communications that can’t be done over Skype (eg. the boss flouncing in and overseeing the latest project from behind the shoulder).

Joseph says:

08:23pm | 25/10/10

Unfortunately I think there are many many men who are now afraid to have any genuine mutual romantic involvement with women met in the workplace because of the perceived risk of having their career destroyed.

As a bloke, I think thats a bad thing.

TheRealDave says:

02:44pm | 25/10/10

I disagree.

I think you’d find that plenty of people would have had a lot more sympathy for Kristy if it wasn’t for all the bullshit that included #37 million dollar claims, overseas hideaways in the Hamptons and putting happy snaps up on Facebook while claiming mental stress from all the attention.

Sow what you reap and all.

Cate P says:

12:20pm | 25/10/10

Thank you Dennis you have it.  Especially about the hands.  Common sense, courtesy and good manners go a long way towards making a pleasant, productive, and safe workplace for everyone.

Katie says:

04:14pm | 25/10/10

Beautifully put Dennis!

Your name:Kathy says:

08:15pm | 25/10/10

Thanks Dennis, well put

Carolyn says:

07:58am | 26/10/10

Yes, Dennis has nailed it, so to speak.

Kurt says:

01:12pm | 26/10/10

Dennis you living in a dream world mate…  is nice as what you saying is, life doesn’t work that way… i must say harassment is serious and you should be professional at work

We spend most of our lives at work, to say that you can only work at work is impossible and kind of naive .

Brad says:

11:27am | 25/10/10

I don’t get it - I must be a complete idiot. I thought this case was about repeated unwanted inappropriate behaviour where repeated clear negative verbal and non verbal “no” was given. Clearly sexual harassment to me, however no one has all of the facts here.
Simple advice for everyone: Act appropriately for the 2010 equal rights workplace, if you like someone say hi and ask them out for a drink / date, if they say no walk away - plenty of other fish in the sea, no touching, no staring, no derogatory comments, no inappropriate jokes / emails / pictures in the workplace. Too easy.

Maria C says:

12:07pm | 25/10/10

Actually, you are wrong.
Prior to Sexual Harassment, there was Harassment and Bullying.
In the last 15 years there have been a number of high profile cases about bullying in which there have been some positive outcomes.
It isn’t the innocent looking that is a problem, it is the your a little girl, i am a big man and therefore I can make inappropriate comments and crude jokes, if not make inappropriate contact that is the problem.
Flirting gone wrong is sad, it is the deliberate manipulation and exercise of power to intimidate people that is the issue.

Fair Play says:

04:11pm | 25/10/10

Thank God! Another self-respecting, and common sense female! I too, am tired of watching my female co-workers do the “female” thing when a man appears on the scene. In a room full of women, they are as tough and down to earth as the rest of us, but a suit full of testosterone strolls through the doorway or enters the lift, and these women start twiddling their hair, checking their hemlines and giggling.

Come on, girls! Stop bullying these men by playing on their confusion over who you really are. You may even discover that they make really good friends - not just sex objects.

Sad Panda says:

08:28am | 26/10/10

Kudos to you, Lisa H. The sanest post in this entire thread. For many years I had the misfortune of working for a company overpopulated by 20-something females who could send sexually explicit emails and smutty texts and then in a blink of an eye squawk harassment.

Bek says:

12:21am | 27/10/10

Lisa, I’d wager that I’m fairly similar in outlook to you - however, unfortunately sometimes its not like that.
I have been in some great places, but some places (and there are a hell of a lot of them, either for myself, or people I know) do expect a certain level of ‘sexual appeal’... Places that hire underqualified / inexperienced girls over perfectly capable male applicants - simply because a girl ‘fits with their company image’ - and the boss likes having eyecandy… This culture is not new, but its not getting better either.  Yes, there are those that play on it (and they annoy me no end) - but if it wasn’t accepted, then shouldn’t they be counselled by their boss?  Just like any other inappropriate workplace behaviour?
Seriously - I would call myself a feminist - but I don’t want to place myself with the likes of some very stupid women…
When our society wraps everything in sex, teaches kids that to be popular / rich / ‘a somebody’ - you have to be sexy, and be willing to do anything…  The idealism is exposed, just a little.

Naomi says:

04:36pm | 25/10/10

I support your comments completely. As a woman, I find the current concept of Women’s Liberation offensive and demeaning. The differences between men and women are something to be celebrated, not highlighted and shamed. I’m embarrassed to be female when confronted with the rantings of an illogical Women’s Liberation supporter. I don’t support their ideals, I don’t condone what they do and I certainly don’t feel that they are leading us in a positive direction.

bec says:

05:17pm | 25/10/10

Naomi, you are perfectly welcome to renounce your rights to vote, keep a job after marriage and own property. I hear Afghanistan is lovely this time of year for self-hating ladies…

Don’t bite the hand that feeds you, lest you actually get what you wish for and find yourself in a Serena-Joy situation…

Lisa H. says:

06:48pm | 25/10/10

But what is the current concept of women’s lib, Naomi?
Like any political issue, there are a few lobbyists that set the agenda, and that agenda reflects on the rest of us.

I think that the real discrimination against women is felt more by married women, and mothers. Perhaps discrimination these days is behind closed doors - financial discrimination, where the male partner will not support his wife’s business interests, for example (that’s a big one that’s not discussed so much)

Back in the world of feminist lobbyists, which is the land of the employee, many women will often resort to a ‘sexual sell’, perhaps because they don’t have the resources or imagination for a different approach.

Perhaps we could chalk it up to a cultural thing, where women think they have to be attractive and amenable to men to get ahead, and men are only too happy to encourage this way of thinking!

If this case has taught up anything, it is that sexual poltiics really has to grow up in this country.

What is appropriate at work just came under the microscope, and the broader picture of ‘women’s lib’ might be better off for that.

fairsfair says:

07:47pm | 25/10/10

holy crap, totally true. It is embarassing and infuriating to watch women “struggle” to achieve all these wants at the expense of others.  It is getting out of control and goes so far beyond what this case even represents. It is destroying the social fabric of all of our lives to a point where people can hardly communicate these days for fear of backlash. Women, turn it down a notch this extreme feminism is past its used by date. We should shift our focus to achieving what we currently have for all. That community announcement last night is a prime example. I am extremely grateful for what the feminist movement of past decades has achieved for my gender - but come on - we all find outselves in a pretty good situation these days. Lets work on equal rights for all because in Australia, the gender divide is hardly evident in 2010. If even there I would describe it as being a bunch of beaten down males, who can’t comment on a woman’s hair without being told off and a group of power hungry self obsessed females who strive to achieve their own personal demands [which is generally only] to be noticed, but then decide they don’t want the attention that they generate for themselves.

Beenthere says:

04:30pm | 25/10/10

Hi Sunnie, I have a life time restraining order in place against a female ex-colleague…some women seem to think they are bulletproof against harrassment claims…. this one no longer does…Its a hard road to make a claim as a male, but sometimes necessary….what was the name of that film with Michael Douglas and Glenn Close?

Katie says:

04:48pm | 25/10/10

I think you’re absolutely right Sunnie - no sexual harrassment should be allowed by men or women. Neither should be made to feel as if they’re overreacting - if you’re uncomfortable, that’s it. You can’t help how you feel. If you tell someone they’re making you uneasy, they have no right to disregard that.

Unfortunately 90% of the time anyone who says anything is told they’re overreacting. The first time it happened to me I was very young and even my parents laughed and told me that ‘boys will be boys’. (I was actually groped on a couple of different occasions, I might add.) I can’t begin to describe the sick feeling of dread in my stomach every time I had to go to work. I had to quit because he wouldn’t leave me alone and no one would do anything to help. Looking back, I’m glad I got out when I did because it only would have got worse.

Later on it happened again and and I told the guy straight out to leave me alone and stop making inappropriate comments, to which he predictably told me to get a sense of humour. (Regarding jokes about my anatomy, underwear and sex life. Uh huh.) So the next time he made inappropriate comments after I’d told him to cut it out, I just went straight to my boss. He was fantastic - he told me I’d done exactly the right thing by telling the guy to stop his behaviour, and coming to him when it didn’t stop. My boss went straight to the guy’s supervisor and the ops manager. Turns out he was already on his second warning and he got booted. Yay!

A few other times guys have said things that have made me uncomfortable, and I’ve just told them if it’s happened more than once. It’s been a bit awkward at first, but then it’s been fine. As a few others have said, people have different lines and what makes me uncomfortable might be fine with someone else. Mostly they’ve had no idea they’re making you uneasy until you say something, unless they’re deliberately doing it to make you squirm. You just need to tell them, nice and tactfully in a non-aggressive manner. They apologise for offending you, you accept the apology, you get on with your work relationship. (Of course, jokes about a woman’s body/sex life or continually asking someone for a date when they’ve already said no is never appropriate!) If it doesn’t stop, it’s time to report it.

Joseph says:

10:56am | 26/10/10

That’s so frustrating.

Men have their hands tied over anything sexual in the workplace, including trying to ask a girl out in good faith, while women are free to use their sexuality for their own advancement without repercussions.

bec says:

05:15pm | 25/10/10

Wow. I feel unclean just reading that.

Beenthere says:

01:23pm | 26/10/10

Completely agree Alexis, woman are probably more guilty of covert gossip, chat and subversive harrassment (witness the sexy look job interview) but tend to blatantly get away with it. The legal position you stated is the exactly correct response….women blaming men for undue attention when they have their boobs out on display is provocation and should be duly made to be accountable behaviour. These women clearly intend to manipulate the situation then cry wolf, fortunately the courts recognise this nowdays and its only the lack of counteraction by men that is keeping punitive harrassment claims by women alive.

Beenthere says:

01:23pm | 26/10/10

Completely agree Alexis, woman are probably more guilty of covert gossip, chat and subversive harrassment (witness the sexy look job interview) but tend to blatantly get away with it. The legal position you stated is the exactly correct response….women blaming men for undue attention when they have their boobs out on display is provocation and should be duly made to be accountable behaviour. These women clearly intend to manipulate the situation then cry wolf, fortunately the courts recognise this nowdays and its only the lack of counteraction by men that is keeping punitive harrassment claims by women alive.

Helen says:

08:24am | 26/10/10

“Even my unreconstructed old-school blokey 67 year old taxi driver husband has no trouble at all understanding and applying the differences between personal social interaction and sexual harrassment, so it can’t be that difficult.”

LOL Vicki, exactly. I’m absolutely gobsmacked at the entitled attitude of men who equate not touching other people inappropriately as an onerous requirement. Where on earth do they get this? Boy’s schools? The people I work with are pretty normal and I imagine their reaction to this would be a massive eyeroll.
Not touching people inappropriately or being a massive douchebag shouldn’t be hard. As for the bad-taste emails/texts, whoever imagined they were something for the work environment? It’s as if adults are now overgrown children who have to be told the most basic things about being a professional at work.

Helen says:

08:28am | 26/10/10

“...relate to women ‘as if they are people.’” What a radical concept.

Tim says:

07:44am | 26/10/10

I would think the exact opposite.
The reason they settled is to stop the bad publicity which Fraser-Kirk and her PR team had organised, rather than any sense of guilt.
If anything all the settlement shows is that Fraser-Kirk’s case was extremely weak because she ended up settling for the same amount that DJ’s offered her in the beginning.

Joseph says:

08:21am | 26/10/10

Hey mate, you’re not alone.

I’ve had my female boss ask uncomfortable questions about what I get up to on the weekend and the girls I’m with. Her and a very senior woman in my company were discussing a new graduate employee in front of me and how everyone’s getting excited because he used to be a male model. I won’t go into their comments, but I remember thinking if genders were reversed I could easily hit them for harrasment.

AJyetagain says:

06:47pm | 27/10/10

Joeseph, you an hit them for harrassment, you have a good case…and its not as uncommon as men think to win these although usually the details are kept out of the papers

Eric says:

05:27am | 27/10/10

I don’t have a problem with women. I have a problem with feminism. The two are not the same.

notSue says:

11:07am | 27/10/10

No, you don’t have a problem with women..as long as they are submissive, subjugated,  and most importantly, quiet about continuing inequalities with men (little things like equal pay for equal work, sexual harrassment, sexual assault and exploitation- trivialities like that) many years after the birth of feminism.
The attitudes you have posted in thread after thread reflect very clearly why feminism is still required. Or maybe you’re just a plain old misogynist afterall?

Bev says:

04:16pm | 26/10/10

I have a different theory. In the beginning Fraser-Kirk claimed that other woman had been harassed and would form part of the case. The defence properly asked well in that case who are these woman and what are they claiming so we can examine the evidence and prepare a defence.  Fraser-Kirk’s lawyers then pertitioned the judge to not have to supply this information.  To which the reply came from the defence that was a denial of justice.  The judge agreed and threatened to throw the case out if the information was not supplied At this point Fraser-Kirk had an an “attack of the vapours” and disappeared for a holiday which she wanted DJ to pay for.  I would suggest that at this point the other women decided they didn’t like the idea of their claims being contested publicly and they withdrew. Her case now severely weakened she settled for what she could get.

Helen says:

11:45am | 27/10/10

I don’t blame those other women at all. Presumably some or most of them would still be working there and that is a completely different kettle of fish. It takes a lot of intestinal fortitude to stand up to this sort of thing knowing you will be vilified in the media and commented on by people who know very little about equal opportunity law and less about their particular situation (*cough*internet comment threads *cough*).

notSue says:

03:31pm | 28/10/10

Oh for gawds sake, no-one said men AREN"T victims of inappropriate behviour from women in the workplace as you were. What has been repeatedly said is that it is overwhelmingly women who are on the receiving end, and have been since women entered the workforce. Thank goodness the ladies had the good sense to realise you didn’t appreciate the gift and no further incidents occurred. In other words, you were NOT harrassed. Harrrassment means REPEATED inappropriate conduct when the person has requested it to cease or indicated that it is not wanted.

How easy to point the finger and demonise a “feminist agenda” when a women/women who HAVE been harrased have speak up. Yes, sexual harrassment is something feminists fight against and I for one am proud of it.

Eric says:

05:22am | 29/10/10

notSue, you just provided another example of feminist double standards. This incident was harassment, even if it only happened once - and would be recognised as such if the victim had been a woman.

Your misandry is very obvious, and thus a fine example of why we need a movement to fight all the discrimination against men.

Steve_of_Cornubia says:

06:11am | 29/10/10

@notSue

As expected, a feminist dismisses this incident as unimportant and thinks the women in question were ‘ladies with good sense’.

Enough said on the equality front methinks.

notSue says:

09:48am | 29/10/10

@ Eric and Steve. Beg to differ again, gentlemen. I did not dismiss the incident Steve quoted as “unimportant”. In fact, I applauded Steve for making his co-workers aware of his reaction to the gift, thereby fforestalling any further incidents. Yes, the women were sensible in recognising that their action was inapprorpiate, as any man hopefully would be when receiving a similar reaction from a woman.
Perhaps my definition of harrassment is flawed, granted, however, I understand it to mean that a single incident does not qualify as ” harrassment” per se. It is inappropriate, and if his co-workers had not responded to his objection, Steve would have had every right to take it further.

Btw, just because a woman, (or a man, for that matter), describes themself as a feminist, I am amused at how quickly the assumption is made that that person is a man hater,( which is what misandry means).
Perhaps a definition of the word would prove helpful for you also? “Feminist - a person who advocates equal rights for women”. That iincludes the right to be safe and unmolested at work, EQUAL to men.

Have a great day, fellas.