While I’m not actively researching for Undead Sexist Cliches any more, I did wind up reading The Bad Apple Theory in Sexual Harassment Law by Anna Lawton (downloadable here) and I’ll probably incorporate some of her thoughts into the sexual harassment chapter. The paper argues that to avoid liability for sexual harassers in their workforce, companies only have to a)have a No Sexual Harassment policy and b)have a reporting system. Doesn’t matter whether they enforce the policy or do anything to prevent harassment; there’s no other obligation on them until a worker reports (this was a 2005 paper so that may have changed, of course). It’s okay to make the reporting system unusable: one company required workers report within a week of the incident (at which point the victim may be debating whether it’s really bad enough to make an issue of it), then penalized a worker who took longer. The courts were okay with the retaliation — that’s just an internal business management decision, right?
The whole piece was worth reading, reminding me of Marti Noxon’s discussion of how employers need to be conscious of how the office environment can nourish harassment if they don’t act to prevent it.
An incel pepper-sprayed and assaulted people with little consequence, but he’s now in trouble from making bomb threats.
David Futrelle looks at violent men who are convinced their desire for women is something women do to them.
More on Matt Gaetz’ alleged statutory rape case.
First came women’s liberation. Then some conservative Christians became convinced complementarianism — women and men must exist in separate spheres — was a Biblical imperative. Now it’s considered an integral element of the faith.
Should misogynistic violence be a hate crime?