Is a guy who grabs a girls butt a creep or a criminal?

Lately there have been a flood of men who got more than a little touchy in the distant past, and have lost their jobs as a result.  At the same time in California many employers can't even legally ask potential employees if they have criminal records on the pre-employment application, because "convicted criminals including felons, have rights" and "deserve the right to be equally considered for jobs they qualify for". 

 

I find it quite disconcerting that real criminals are getting a pass at the same time as scummy men are loosing their jobs.  Someone can murder someone they don't like and are entitled to a job, but loose it because women say they were grabby 20 years ago. 

 

I thought punishments were supposed to be proportional to the crime.

Comments

Autumn Cote Added Dec 16, 2017 - 2:24am
Please note, the second best way to draw more attention to your work is to comment on the work of others. I know this to be true because if you do, I'll do everything in my power to draw more attention to your articles (there is a lot I can do and would like to do on your behalf).  
Stone-Eater Added Dec 16, 2017 - 4:22am
Rusty
 
Right. Out of proportion, the whole thing. Same catches on here in Europe.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Dec 16, 2017 - 9:02am
I have two articles addressing the problem. Two men have committed suicide over the matter. It is as though the solution that is being posited calls for men to ignore women for other men. Still, it could be we are witnessing a colossal shift where society once again becomes matriarchal. 
Rusty Smith Added Dec 16, 2017 - 4:56pm
Dr. Rupert Green  I don't know if America will become matriarchal but a whole lot of industries might no longer be as open and accessible to women who want to trade sex for opportunities.
 
I am starting to see male managers preferring to hire men, and often white ones, because they can't bring with them all the sexual and racial problems that we hear so much about.
 
I have to admit it's brilliant.  There is no way to prove someone didn't deny you a position illegally if they don't say or do stupid things that implicate themselves.
 
I think a lot if fear of unjustified accusations and law suits.  Even if a man does nothing wrong and is accused, it's hell on his career.
Benjamin Goldstein Added Dec 16, 2017 - 5:31pm
Women in hijab are now basically unhirable. The chances that you get sued for some BS are damn high. It's called litigation jihad. These activist pain-in-the-ass Muslims destroy the lives of their fellow Muslim sisters. Feminists do the same.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Dec 16, 2017 - 7:19pm
@ Benjamin. "Women in hijab are now basically s. The chances that you get sued for some BS are damn high. It's called litigation jihad. These activist pain-in-the-ass Muslims destroy the lives of their fellow Muslim sisters. Feminists do the same."
 
If one could be as devout as Mother Theresa, even she would know the foolhardiness of wearing that clothing on a job interview. Thus, even Jesus would not wear his sandal on a job interview. After he gets the job and passes his 6 months probation, then that is another story.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Dec 16, 2017 - 7:26pm
@Rusty. " don't know if America will become matriarchal but a whole lot of industries might no longer be as open and accessible to women who want to trade sex for opportunities.
 
I am starting to see male managers preferring to hire men, and often white ones, because they can't bring with them all the sexual and racial problems that we hear so much about."
 
The slow grid of some evolutionary change will have us long dead before it manifests. America could go matriarchal after this Salem on men hare them retracting theirs to become la femmen. Hell! Only a man with a death wish would open his legs, er wallet to accommodate a woman who explicitly states she wants to work as an headmistress.  
Flying Junior Added Dec 17, 2017 - 2:46am
I am starting to see male managers preferring to hire men, and often white ones, because they can't bring with them all the sexual and racial problems that we hear so much about.
 
Wow!  Preferential treatment for white men?  When did that start?
 
Rusty Smith Added Dec 17, 2017 - 11:27am
Flying Junior  I don't think preferential treatment for white men is new, but it sure got a boost after racial discrimination law suites became the big thing, and I see a resurgence now that so many women are claiming they were sexually abused.
 
It's not right, and it's defiantly not good for business to hire a less qualified candidate just because they aren't as likely to sue your company, but it sure is wise for the hiring manager who would be the target of a lawsuit if one was filed.
 
In a way it might actually have been "good for business".   Back when racial discrimination was the fad my company went though a time when it seemed like most minorities that were laid off and many that were simply not promoted sued our company frivolously.  I know those were frivolous because I was part of the defense team and we were up against a group of attorneys who looked for and contacted all the minorities we let go, and told them they could get them money if they agreed to sue.  
 
We even had temp employees sue because the permanent replacement for a job they were hired to do after an employee retired, was filled by someone else who was another protected category.
 
One of my first in that category was a woman who narrowed it down to "I discriminated against her because I didn't like Powerful, Black, Women in traditionally male dominated jobs.  She had to include ALL those categories because I had plenty of Women, and Blacks, working for me at that time, who liked me and I hired all of them including her.  She didn't even sue because she was let go, she had developed an allergy to her new work environment, and I put her in a less hazardous environment in the same department with the same pay.
 
Law suites cost lots of money and time and only the blind didn't realize we can't be sued if we stopped hiring protected categories.
 
Sad part is the women who are making accusations 20 years later are scaring employees, and causing many to discriminate against women today.  Today our values and what is considered acceptable behavior is completely different, so much of what is making headline news today would already be a lawsuit, not big deal 20 years later.
 
Fear never makes for good employment decisions.
Rusty Smith Added Dec 17, 2017 - 11:34am
Dr. Rupert Green  I've never interviewed someone in a hijab but if I did and didn't want to hire them I'd just hire someone who is more qualified.  Today there are so many qualified applicants that it's hard to choose the "best one". 
 
I often l select candidates who have less experience but an attitude that I think is much better and when I compare my hiring success to other managers I think I do pretty well.  I measure success on job performance a year after hiring.
 
A person with a bad attitude who won't fit in with their work group is much more damaging in the long run than one who needs a little more training. 
 
I can always get someone the job training they need if they have a good attitude, I can't fix a bad attitude.
Thomas Napers Added Dec 21, 2017 - 4:19am
While I don’t agree with California’s policy, I can appreciate the belief that criminals have paid their debt to society and deserve a second chance.
 
I think there are too many variables regarding sexual misconduct that warrant making broad conclusions as you have done here.  Each case is different and I can’t think of a single case where the punishment didn’t fit the “crime.”  Is there one you had in mind?
Dave Volek Added Dec 21, 2017 - 8:32am
Once again Rusty puts a unique angle to a social issue that many thinkers fail to see.
 
I think it's a good thing that this harassment is coming out in the open. I had been thinking there is a dark side, but I just couldn't put my finger on it. Rusty pointed it out.
 
I don't know what is the right solution. But I think the lesson is clear for many men: stop hitting on woman in the workplace--especially when you don't know them very well. 
 
 
 
 
 
Bill Kamps Added Dec 21, 2017 - 9:51am
Rusty, it is a good point.  There is a wide range of behavior that falls under the  category of sexual harassment.  Everything from emails  in bad taste, comments in bad taste, to threatening comments, sex for employment quid pro quo, and then assault and rape.  All of these should be against HR policy, some of them are crimes.
 
As a manager I have personally dealt with two cases, neither of which were crimes but  were sexual harassment. 
 
The punishment should fit the behavior.  Many of the high profile people have quit their jobs or been fired without complaint.  This tells me that probably they were guilty not only of what we heard about, but likely more.  The guys know what they did, and probably were trying to get out in front of the fallout.
 
However, I have heard people like Roy Moore and Harvey W called pedophiles because they slept with women under age.  That is not the definition of a pedophile, and so people in the press cant even us the correct language to describe what they are talking about.  Not a big surprise. 
 
Rusty Smith Added Dec 25, 2017 - 12:14am
Bill Kamps I try not to get too caught up in game of trying to judge people by their English skills.  Many times people with poor English skills and sometimes even a poor grasp of a forum topic add ideas that I find very interesting.
 
Probably a good thing, I type fast and don't bother to proof in forums.  To me it's conversation, not a test.
Rusty Smith Added Dec 25, 2017 - 12:19am
Thomas Napers  there is a lot of controversy over this forgive and forget after someone serves their time and even I ride both sides depending on the situation.  
 
If I was hiring someone in an office environment who served time for stationery rape 10 years ago I'd be much more tolerant than I'd be if I was hiring a babysitter for my children and learned an applicant served time for pedophilia.  There are some people I will never trust.
 
As things are if I had a choice between two equally qualified applicants and one had the remnants of gang tattoo's, I'd take the other.  I do have my limits and prejudices.