Slashdot Mirror


Science Has a Sexual Assault Problem

cold fjord writes: Phys.org reports, "The life sciences have come under fire recently with a study published in PLOS ONE that investigated the level of sexual harassment and sexual assault of trainees in academic fieldwork environments. The study found 71% of women and 41% of men respondents experienced sexual harassment, while 26% of women and 6% of men reported experiencing sexual assault. The research team also found that within the hierarchy of academic field sites surveyed, the majority of incidents were perpetrated by peers and supervisors. The New York Times notes, "Most of these women encountered this abuse very early in their careers, as trainees. The travel inherent to scientific fieldwork increases vulnerability as one struggles to work within unfamiliar and unpredictable conditions."

57 of 460 comments (clear)

  1. Is there a single field that doesn't? by Rinikusu · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.

    --
    If you were me, you'd be good lookin'. - six string samurai
    1. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Chelloveck · · Score: 5, Funny

      I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.

      It tells me that the definitions are too broad to be useful. Oh, crap, I said "broad". Now I'm guilty too!

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    2. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Women regularly use their sexuality in the workplace for their gain. Watch how the young/attractive colleagues act around those in positions of power, compared to other female or lower grade staff, especially when they want something. E.g. time off when shit is hitting the fan, or when vacation days are all blocked off due to lack of staff. They're conditioned early on to use it for their advantage, but don't see the hypocrisy of their position.

    3. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by NotSanguine · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can't think of a single profession which doesn't seem to have a "problem." Makes one wonder.

      Makes you wonder what, exactly? That this is not a "problem", because "everybody's doing it?" WTF? Look pal, the "problem" is narrow-minded, clueless misogynist views like that.

      Wow! Just wow! I was thinking the same thing myself, except I put "this is a societal problem, not one just in the academic community," after 'Makes one wonder'. Way to go in projecting your fears and negativity on others.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    4. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well yes, you are, guilty of deflecting criticism by claiming the definitions are too broad.

      That's a common defensive reaction.

    5. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 2

      Hey!

      Us handsome dudes get extra rewards too. Just because we look so fucking good.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    6. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is anecdotal, but a friend works in academia and hears about grad students being coerced. They put up with it because reporting their advisor would undo everything they've been working for years on, and they're so close to the end the personal cost is just too high.

      Some professions like accounting require you to intern at one company. It's possible dropping out of that mid-program could be as much of a setback.

      Whereas if you have a harassing boss in an office job, you can turn them in and find another job. If your resume shows you worked at multiple companies, I don't think anyone would bat an eye.

    7. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by jedidiah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was some feminazi that went on a tear because some guy had the audacity to hit on her. Then she whined when the corresponding community luminaries pointed out that she was being a hysterical idiot. The whole situation was portrayed as proof that "X community is mysoginistic".

      It was all a load of mindless victimology.

      There can be a wide gap between how a bunch of extremist crusaders define a term and how the rest of us define it.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mean+pun · · Score: 2, Funny

      Your description certainly reads like calm and objective description of the situation.

    9. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by RatBastard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If he's talking about "Elevatorgate", then he's accurate, even if he's not calm about it.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    10. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by RatBastard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Makes you wonder what, exactly?"

      That this is a widespread social problem and not something restricted to just the nerdy professions. Project much?

      Insightful, my ass.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    11. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by ganjadude · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, crap, I said "broad". Now I'm guilty too!

      you joke but you are probably correct here. The issue is not that 71% of all women are being sexually assaulted. Its that 71% of all women "feel assaulted" Somehow in the past 40 years what someones feelings are trump what the actual actions are.

      Saying something sexual, is NOT sexual assault.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    12. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      well, he kan reed, so who knows

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    13. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You've got it.

      There are clear and exact boundaries accepted by rational and sane people. Hitting or flirting on someone - especially a peer, is not harassment. Some "feminists" think it is.

      Hitting on a subordinate, especially a direct report, is not acceptable.
      Hitting on someone AFTER they ask you to stop crosses the line into harassment.

      It's that simple.

    14. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by An+Ominous+Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, because if that is what the poster was referencing, "going on a tear" was actually saying "guys, don't do that", with the context being: sexual propositioning a stranger in an enclosed space in a foreign country at 4 AM after having just listened to the person you're propositioning give a presentation that included discussion on how the constant sexual propositions she received at these conferences made her uncomfortable.

      THAT in turn led to her receiving a never-ending wave of abuse, including rape and death threats, and including having one of the most prominent male voices in the movement insultingly state that women in the west shouldn't complain about sexism because women in Islamic countries have it a lot worse.

      It was after all THAT, that she, quite rightly, started going on a tear.

    15. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You know, this has some truth to it. The root of the problem though, is that this kind of crap from supervises is tolerated. It's a problem with permanent-contract and tenure culture just as much, because the offenders cannot be dealt with or fired with cause as they should.

      I do sympathize with people who are in such vulnerable positions. I only wish they operated like where I work - where if anyone tried this kind of thing they'd simply get fired, as they should.

    16. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mythosaz · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, here's the actual questions:

      32. Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at an anthropological field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you.)

      The section is entitled Sexual harassment and assault so you would hope people would be contextually aware that "or other jokes" means of a sexual nature. But it's still a badly worded question. I further assume the reader is supposed to parse "inappropriate or sexual" as prefixes for the other items, but we live in a tightly wound panties world when comments about physical beauty are harassment.

      39. Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at an anthropological field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you.)

      The problem, again, is a terribly worded question. Are we to again assume physical should extend through the commas? Or is unwanted sexual contact just a fat girl asking a handsome dude to get a date after the working day is done. Is all physical contact unwanted sexual contact now?

      The math for their statistical distributions is fine.

      Their questions suck, lack good wording, and lack examples. [Not limited to but including... ...excluding FOO, but not limited to BAR.]

    17. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by dkman · · Score: 2

      I can think of one, and it's the oldest profession.

      --
      I refuse to sign
    18. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by dkman · · Score: 2

      Saying something sexual, is NOT sexual assault.

      That was before the PC revolution, and I'm not talking about computers here.

      --
      I refuse to sign
    19. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by NotSanguine · · Score: 2

      > Way to go in projecting your fears and negativity on others.

      The GP didn't do that. They weren't responding to you. That evidence is an example of you projecting.

      The OP (rinukuzu) made an excellent observation -- that this is not limited to a single profession. The obvious implication is that this is a problem with our whole society, yet Jawnn assumed the GP was somehow trying to claim the problem doesn't exist. That isn't supported by what was posted.

      Yes, I know Jawnn wasn't responding to me -- I hadn't posted anything. I was just struck by the completely negative tone, with Jawnn making a failrly obvious faulty assumptions about what the OP said.

      I'm not sure what I'm projecting. I say there's a big problem with violence against women and it's not limited to academia.

      What I don't support is poor reading comprehension. Both you and Jawnn seem to have that in spades. Geez Louise! get a grip.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
    20. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Kielistic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually Slashdot is like that about everything. What really gets to some on Slashdot is how people like you act all sanctimonious and incredulous when people disagree about something, and only when it comes to feminism.

    21. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      we live in a tightly wound panties world when comments about physical beauty are harassment.

      Which is why there's a lot of eye rolling when the topic comes up. No matter how many trainings you make your employees go to, you cannot force them to accept complimenting somebody as assault. Just like the movie Reefer Madness, once you've compromised a part of your message by being ridiculous the entirety of your message is dismissed altogether. I don't know what mental deficiency exists in the minds of people who believe that holding FOUR annual employee trainings on sexual harassment is going to force people to accept some radical attempt to redefine normal civility as assault.

    22. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Same goes for women.

      Why is it always the men that get singled out here? That 6% figure for men ought to be far more eye opening than the figure for women. Basically 1, it's definitely underrported and 2, the focus is still on the women. The focus is always on the women.

      Few men bother to report sexual assault or rape because there's little point in doing so. Most people are under the belief that women don't do that and even if they were to try, it's not technically possible. But, it does happen, even if most cases get swept under the rug.

      As far as the figures for women go, most of the time it's 3rd parties defining it as sexual assault even in cases where the "victim" wouldn't consider it to be sexual assault.

    23. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by ganjadude · · Score: 4, Interesting

      an example or 2 please?

      Ive known someone personally getting in trouble for sexual harassment for simply saying that the woman was wearing a nice shirt today. to her, that was sexual assault, to anyone with common sense, it was a complement

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    24. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Only? Slashdot is FULL of people with sanctimonious behavior on a ton of subjects.

    25. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by nbauman · · Score: 2

      Here's one of the questions:

      The following questions could be answered as “Yes,” “No,” or “I don't know:”

      “Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at a field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you).”

      In terms of good experimental design, that does seem too broad. "Comments about physical beauty" could be harassment or not. It's a leading question. What's inappropriate? They're not measuring sexual harassment, they're measuring their respondents' subjective perceptions of their colleagues' comments.

      It seems as if the researchers were designing the study with the intent of coming up with the largest numbers possible, in order to make the problem seem as big as possible.

      Last week a girl said to me, "that's a nice sweater," which I as a geek trying to understand social interactions interpreted as a friendly way of making small talk. If I said the same thing to a girl, these respondents could report it as sexual harassment.

      This study has flaws that the peer reviewers should have identified.

      I'd like to see studies of sexual harassment that meet the standards I see from rigorous scientific studies elsewhere.

    26. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by nbauman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, what they're talking about is, according to the article:

      “Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at a field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you).”

      That's not sexual assault. I'm not even sure it rises to the level of sexual harassment.

      Flirtation isn't sexual harassment. I'm sure every woman in the country must have been the subject of welcome and unwelcome flirtations.

      At a recent professional meeting, a woman made suggestive sexual remarks to me about a computer program. If I had said the same thing to another woman, the second woman could have interpreted it as harassment under that definition.

      There's a lot of grey areas and political correctness. If you want to look at it with publications in the scientific literature, fine. Let's use rigorous scientific methods to find out what the magnitude of sexual assault is. The first step is get your definitions right.

    27. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      yeah, let me just pull internal documents out of my ass.... look, the problem is that it doesnt matter if any harassment or assault happens these days. all there needs to be for sexual assault/harassment is for someone to "feel" abused, intent no longer matters.

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    28. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mod+prime · · Score: 5, Interesting

      You should read the study, not the article about the study, if you are going to criticize it. The thing you quoted was about harassment, not assault.

      http://www.plosone.org/article...

      "Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at an anthropological field site? (If you have had more than one experience, the most notable to you.)"

      Is the question about sexual assault.

      The grey areas are overwhelmed by the black and white areas. If you feel there are too many grey areas, talk to your manager about getting on a course to help you.

    29. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mod+prime · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you don't want to look like a creep - ask the girl to your room around witnesses (they don't have to hear, just as long as you make it feel safe for her to refuse). Waiting until your alone in a confined space, if not harassing, is very bad manners to the point of being ungentlemanly. Don't do that, guys.

    30. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by MSG · · Score: 2

      the problem is that it doesnt matter if any harassment or assault happens these days. all there needs to be for sexual assault/harassment is for someone to "feel" abused, intent no longer matters.

      You're correct in identifying the standard that is used for sexual harassment. If someone feels harassed, then the issue is treated as harassment. That is not, however, the problem or a problem. It doesn't mean that you'll be fired or even disciplined as a result of the complaint. All it means is that when an employee submits a harassment complaint, that HR treats the complaint seriously and investigates each complaint consistently. If they find that the complaint warrants discipline, then the offending person will be disciplined. Otherwise, there may simply be mediation to remedy the situation.

      Your attitude, ganjadude, that treating harassment claims seriously based on the subjective experience of the person making the claim is "the" problem almost certainly indicates that you take criticism poorly. The problem with harassment is that people against whom complaints are made often retaliate against the person making the complaint rather than accepting criticism and working to create an environment where people feel safe.

    31. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Flirtation, on the job, especially by supervisors, is pretty damn hard to distinguish from sexual harassment. (And may actually legally be sexual harassment, when done at work.)

    32. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Kielistic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It is the mindless and baseless insults to anyone that disagrees with you that makes it flamebait. Your brazen strawmen that make people completely disregard what you have to say. That is also the number one reason that there is such a strong push-back against feminism. Obnoxious, pretentious blow-hards like yourself are the exact reason why so many people think feminism is a joke.

      Of course you will continue to excuse your reprehensible attitude with pious self-importance and sarcastically shrug off any criticism with "most people that disagree are just misogynists" even though you have no reason the believe that and are shown otherwise every time you say it.

      I want you to think about this, i kan reed, every time you feel someone is complaining about "straw-feminists" or "doesn't know what feminism is about". It is because of you and people like you. You are the number one reason that people have a bad image of feminism. It isn't misogyny. It isn't insecurities. People do not fear strong women nor do they fear losing their "privileges" (not that there aren't many feminists that love infringing on the rights of others). It is you. It is you and the other preening mooks like you. The self-aggrandizing attitude that because you are "feminist" you are morally superior and entitled to talk down, belittle, insult and defame anyone that dares say something you do not like.

      You are a straw-feminist.

    33. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Kielistic · · Score: 2

      It's flamebait to imply anything other than feminism is evil and actively attacking poor helpless men. Sorry you didn't know that. It antagonizes the misogynists.

      So what are you saying here other than that anyone that thought your post was flamebait was an antagonized misogynist? I really don't understand how you can think people are going to take you seriously when you say moronic things like that. Especially when you say I am making a strawman. I read what you wrote and I am really unsure how to interpret it other than you implying people are misogynist.

      And I don't give a fuck if you think I'm being "morally superior" to people whose behaviors are outright reprehensible.

      That would be exactly my point. You just label anyone that disagrees with you to have "outright reprehensible behaviour". Either that or you just conveniently ignore (or pretend don't exist) the huge amount of people that disagree with you and do not have reprehensible behaviour. You think that you are better than people; you think that entitles you to act like an asshole.

      Pointing out that you have a brazen superiority complex does not mean I am being self-righteous. You can call me hypocritical and self-righteous all day long but you are still the one constantly going on about how superior you are to all us mere mortal misogynists.

    34. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dawkins has realized that he was using a logical fallacy and has since apologized for that tweet so everyone in this thread that is trying to defend him looks pretty silly.

      She never accused the guy of harassment or assault. She was just pointing out behavior that she found to be creepy and used it as an example of what not to do. The whole video in question had to do with things that make women feel uncomfortable and thus not attend certain conferences. Yes, people have to deal with that from time to time in the larger society but if a specific group of people want to be more inclusive than they certainly shouldn't issue death threats just because someone had the nerve to point out some of those "awkward and uncomfortable" things.

    35. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mean+pun · · Score: 2

      Hint, pressing your body up against an unwilling partner is unwanted sexual contact.

      Greeting someone with a hug is not sexual contact, unwanted or otherwise.

      No, and women will not interpret it as such, even if you misread a situation and give a hug when it was not expected. There is a big difference between a friendly hug and something sexually suggestive. Duration, for a start.

      How the fuck is someone meant to know when you do and don't hug anyway.

      It may be a social faux-pas, but trust me, it's equally fucking awkward when you have Aspergers and people actually expect a hug.

      Yes, understanding when and when not to hug can be problematic if you don't always read the social signs properly. Similar with social kissing. I think most people have had awkward moments like this. There are huge differences between social groups anyway, so misreading the signs is not such a big deal, as long as you keep it friendly. And you can always err on the safe side.

      Or are you telling me that all those women I know are actually making sexual overtures when they expect me to hug them?

      No, of course not. What point are you trying to make?

      So sorry but I give no fucking credibility to a study that treats greeting hugs as 'sexual assault'.

      Is there any evidence that they do?

    36. Re:Is there a single field that doesn't? by mean+pun · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, some people have gotten it into their heads that they have a right to not feel awkard, and that feeling awkward makes them "violated". A clear abuse of the word, if I've ever seen any.

      If a woman ask men kindly not to do some kinds of things because it makes her feel awkward (and it should be obvious even without asking), and if a man then does it anyway, the word `violated' seems pretty accurate to me. He's not interested in her comfort, he's just interested in is own jollies.

  2. Reporting bias? by mattventura · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I've got to think that women are more likely to actually report sexual harassment than men are. Probably wouldn't make up the entire difference, but would still be something to think about.

    1. Re:Reporting bias? by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2

      It is true that women are more likely to report sexual assault(these days) than men. But the differences aren't tremendously dramatic. Google scholar is being awful and not helping me find the study, but I seem to recall it was in the neighborhood of 30% for women and more like 20% for men.

      That's a dramatic enough difference to be quite concerned about how we treat male sexuality, but not so much as to cover the differences seen here.

    2. Re:Reporting bias? by pla · · Score: 2

      I've got to think that women are more likely to actually report sexual harassment than men are.

      I don't think that rates of reporting substantially undermine the presence of a problem, but I do have to agree with you.

      Men learn from a young age that we crave sex, think about it constantly, would bang anything with enough paper bags available, blah blah blah. And while most of us realize that doesn't actually hold true, we tend to passively accept it as part of our social identity. Thus, when some troll-woman flirts a little too shamelessly or even grabs your ass as you walk by (which in this study would have counted as an assault), we just brush it off and even take it as flattering (even while thinking "do... NOT... want!").

      I would therefore agree that we very likely see a serious reporting bias here that tips the scales toward the female side. That said, where do we draw the line (for both genders) between "testing the waters" and "harassment"? Clearly it doesn't "hurt" those men who just brush it off and move on with their day; do we seriously accept, in the modern world, that females count as emotionally weaker and unable to bear similar compliments from ugly guys?

      Personally, I consider this issue more complex than "just don't do it" (which will no doubt enrage the SJWs, but, fuck 'em)... We exist as a sexual species, and no amount of social conditioning can change that fact; on the flip side of that, clearly some people don't get the fact that "no" doesn't mean "try again later".

    3. Re:Reporting bias? by jedidiah · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Women are more likely to be the subject of a sexual advance because men are expected to initiate courtship. Differing social expectations and indoctrination will dictate that women find any advances more objectionable then would men regardless of the level of genuine menace the represent.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    4. Re:Reporting bias? by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Also, whether a woman finds an advance to be "harassment" or not depends on whether or not she's interested in the man.

      So let that be a lesson to you. If you want to avoid harassment:

      1) Be handsome

      2) Be attractive

      3) Don't be unattractive

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  3. Then it happens less in science than in general by Lucas123 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The study the level of sexual assault of trainees in academic fieldwork environments... was 26% of women and 6% of men reported experiencing sexual assault. According to a study by the CDC, 51.9 percent of surveyed women and 66.4 percent of surveyed men said they were physically assaulted as a child by an adult caretaker and/or as an adult by any type of attacker. More than half (54 percent) of the female rape victims identified by the survey were younger than age 18 when they experienced their first attempted or completed rape. Violence against women is primarily intimate partner violence: 64.0 percent of the women who reported being raped, physically assaulted, and/or stalked since age 18 were victimized by a current or former husband, cohabiting partner, boyfriend, or date. In comparison, only 16.2 percent of the men who reported being raped and/or physically assaulted since age 18 were victimized by such a perpetrator. Study: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles...

    1. Re:Then it happens less in science than in general by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're not comparing like against like. This study only looks at sexual assault in one particular environment (which, obviously, is part of someone's lifetime). The NIJ report looks at both physical and sexual assault, over an entire lifetime.

      So that comparison does nothing to show whether sexual assault happens more or less often "in science" than "in general" or compared to any other workplace environment.

  4. Re:Moving the goalposts by i+kan+reed · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And that's a recurring problem in these discussions. That the sexists will imagine a strawman version of the methodology in order to dismiss it. Strawmanning these kinds of concerns is one of two tools in their toolbox. The other is "ignore this, there's [other vaguely comparable problem] so it's balanced" as if the correct thing to do isn't addressing both issues.

  5. Science also has a random hook-up problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Consider the people who attend research conferences in the greatest numbers (grad students). They tend to be
    • Median age mid-20s
    • Single
    • Overworked
    • Underpaid

    They are also being entertained at conferences by a lot of vendors with fat wallets. To say beer flows like water at some of these events is an understatement to say the least. It isn't hard to see how this can lead to sexual assault as well. It of course in no way justifies it, but the culture doesn't impede it very well, either.

    1. Re:Science also has a random hook-up problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This was more or less speaking about field researchers. I myself was a field researcher in my mid-20s with other 20 somethings. We were all underpaid and overworked, same as our laboratory counterparts, but with a twist. Field researchers work in remote locations. There were even very intimate settings, such as the time I and my opposite gender colleague shared a single tent over the course of 3 days on a deserted island hundreds of miles from another human being. Nothing happened, but the opportunity routinely presents itself in this line of work for the a-holes who would exploit it.

  6. HOw to tell a ridiculous sexual claim. by gurps_npc · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Step 1) Do the same query on men.

    2) If the men have a significant response rate, then just maybe that means the problem is YOUR QUESTION IS TOO VAGUE, rather than both genders experiencing sexual issues.

    The mere fact that this article claims that 40+% of men experience 'sexual harassment', proves that their definition of 'sexual harassment' is not reasonable - the kind of thing only a PC fool trying to prove a problem exists would use.

    Similarly, 6% of men experience sexual assault seems on the high side, though not as ridiculous as the 41% claiming harassment.

    The only thing going on here is idiots using bad definitions for their poll.

    --
    excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
  7. Study Questions by Bob9113 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Phrasing of the questions in a survey is important to fully understanding the problem that is being examined. Here are the study questions. Two of the most relevant questions are these:

    32. Have you ever personally experienced inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes, at an anthropological field site?

    39. Have you ever experienced physical sexual harassment, unwanted sexual contact, or sexual contact in which you could not or did not give consent or felt it would be unsafe to fight back or not give your consent at an anthropological field site?

    The PLOS ONE document itself is very thorough, and worth reading through to more fully understand the issue.

    1. Re:Study Questions by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      comments about physical beauty

      So, "your hair looks nice" is sexual harassment?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    2. Re:Study Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yep and inappropriate comments like "your are stupid" suddenly get mixed together with "sexual" because the question asks about "inappropriate or sexual" instead of "inappropriate sexual".

      But this is a minor problem. The bigger problem is their approach to sampling. They use voluntary online survey. These type of surveys tend to be answered by people with vested interest in the topic and ignored by people busy with other things. How do I know that their sample is no good? Here is a quote

      Hundreds of respondents, recruited online, answered our survey questions. A majority of the sample were women N = 516/666 (77.5%).

      So they have a miniscule sample, that is horribly biased towards one sex (for comparison see the gender and race distribution in academia here".

    3. Re:Study Questions by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      Holy crap I didn't realize that. A self-selected online survey? And based at that absolutely meaningless metric, "science has a sexual assault problem?" Fuck that.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    4. Re:Study Questions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Fuck that.

      Oops there we go again... Now Slashdot has a sexual assault problem.

  8. Re:It's all about perception.. by mark-t · · Score: 2

    I'm pretty darn sure that paying attention to somebody else on the allegation that they are better looking than you does not actually qualify as sexual harassment.

  9. nonsense by silfen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The article looks at field work, not science as a whole. The results are self-reported, not verified or verifiable. And "harassment" and "assault" are defined so broadly that many normal day-to-day interactions can fall under them. In short, there is no evidence that "science has a sexual assault problem" in any standard meaning of those words.

    Much as feminists and other progressives like to establish such a principle, in reality, just because you feel uncomfortable or believe that something was inappropriate doesn't mean anybody has actually done anything wrong.

  10. Dialogue v. Trolling by Etherwalk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well yes, you are, guilty of deflecting criticism by claiming the definitions are too broad.

    That's a common defensive reaction.

    Problems should be well-defined. Someone can take that position whether they're doing it defensively or not and still be making a legitimate point. Calling it defensive, notably on a topic where there is moral stigma associated with being defensive about it, is just an ad hominem attack.

    There are plenty of legitimate critiques of Parent's message--he appears to be dismissing out-of-hand an issue that affects hundreds of millions of people a year. He also failed to state what definitions he thinks are too broad to be useful. Responding with a question about one or more of those that might make people think about the issue is the difference between trolling and dialogue.

  11. Oh the irony of it all ... by BarbaraHudson · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Just since yesterday afternoon, apk (the HOSTS file troll) has posted 100 responses to posts I've made. The ones in this thread were among the tamest ...

    "you transsexual weirdo"
    "I did *NOT* bother "shim"

    The others included references and links to a pic from Rocky Horror Picture Show, saying that I was nuts for "cutting off my balls", "He/She", Frank. N. Furter, "you are mentally unhinged by taking estrogen to attempt to upset your body's natural order of things, which yes, includes your mind taking a huge hit. You have mentally unbalanced yourself more than doing something quite insane in a sex change to yourself also."

    And a lot more. And this goes on every day ...

    Sexual harassment in a thread about sexual harassment? This all started because someone asked "What is APK" and I told them.

    Now, back on topic, the headline is mislabeled (so what else is new). It says "Science has a sexual assault problem," whereas the actual survey talks about sexual harassment. And a lot of posters seem to have failed to make the distinction.

    One (not exhaustive) definition of sexual harassment I would use is words or acts containing references to sex or sexual identity that either make me uncomfortable, or, or, in APK's case, were intended to make me uncomfortable but failed. Sexual assault, on the other hand, is when I'm lying on a hospital gurney in emergency with paper towels stuffed between my legs to stop the bleeding after being attacked. And for the doubters that sexual assault is under-reported, I didn't report that incident - the doctors did. I couldn't tell them. I just wanted the whole world to leave me suffer alone in peace.

    Sexual harassment is not a case of "I'll know it when I see it", because too many of the harassers simply don't get it in the first place. Saying so doesn't make me a feminazi - there are plenty of men who do "get it". And there are other parts of the world where it's a heck of a lot worse, due to a culture that treats women as 3rd-class citizens.

    --
    "Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.