Hahahahahahaha.
Anyone who has been forced to sit through one of these brainwashing sessions at work knows they're ineffective. Now the UK paper the Guardian is reporting that a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley thinks they might actually have a counter-effect.
This is happening for several reasons. One -- which I personally witnessed at work -- is the examples they give of sexual harassment make it seem like a cartoonish joke. No one takes these "re-enactments" in the films they show seriously.
But more importantly, because these films (and talks) hammer home the point that women are special, wilting flowers, the men who go through sexual harassment training tend to see women as women per se, not co-workers. I've said for years this would happen. From the article:
“The purpose of sexual harassment policy is to make men and women more equal in the workplace,” said Justine Tinkler, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Georgia and co-author of the study. “If the policies are sort of activating gender stereotypes rather than challenging them, they may not be promoting that broader goal.”
Other problems caused by such training include a backlash against women (duh), paranoia against false accusations, and...oh wait...what's this? Hm. Looks like THEY DON'T WORK!!!!!
"Despite those training policies, UC Berkeley administrators and professors have repeatedly harassed subordinates and students and faced light punishments after the university substantiated allegations. That includes a famous astronomer, a tenure-track professor and the law dean, who was ordered to take a training course after he was found guilty."
As I said: Hahahahaha. This reminds me of those "D.A.R.E." programs they did in schools that were supposed to turn kids away from drugs, but instead ended up getting kids interested in them.
It's also telling that a UK paper broke this story. The U.S. media is way too prudish to be able to handle this. I usually don't like to send traffic to media sites, but in this case, the Guardian deserves them, because this stuff needs to be reported.
Anyone who has been forced to sit through one of these brainwashing sessions at work knows they're ineffective. Now the UK paper the Guardian is reporting that a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley thinks they might actually have a counter-effect.
This is happening for several reasons. One -- which I personally witnessed at work -- is the examples they give of sexual harassment make it seem like a cartoonish joke. No one takes these "re-enactments" in the films they show seriously.
But more importantly, because these films (and talks) hammer home the point that women are special, wilting flowers, the men who go through sexual harassment training tend to see women as women per se, not co-workers. I've said for years this would happen. From the article:
“The purpose of sexual harassment policy is to make men and women more equal in the workplace,” said Justine Tinkler, assistant professor of sociology at the University of Georgia and co-author of the study. “If the policies are sort of activating gender stereotypes rather than challenging them, they may not be promoting that broader goal.”
Other problems caused by such training include a backlash against women (duh), paranoia against false accusations, and...oh wait...what's this? Hm. Looks like THEY DON'T WORK!!!!!
"Despite those training policies, UC Berkeley administrators and professors have repeatedly harassed subordinates and students and faced light punishments after the university substantiated allegations. That includes a famous astronomer, a tenure-track professor and the law dean, who was ordered to take a training course after he was found guilty."
As I said: Hahahahaha. This reminds me of those "D.A.R.E." programs they did in schools that were supposed to turn kids away from drugs, but instead ended up getting kids interested in them.
It's also telling that a UK paper broke this story. The U.S. media is way too prudish to be able to handle this. I usually don't like to send traffic to media sites, but in this case, the Guardian deserves them, because this stuff needs to be reported.
