This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Sexual harrassment

Jump to new

Perhaps this experience and analysis adds some light to this universal question.

Fourteen years ago I was raped by a stranger at knife-point. I told no one at the time. I did not whisper a word of it until more than 11 years later, in a small therapy office in Sydney, when my therapist asked me why I had moved my chair to a far corner of the room. I said I couldn’t bear to sit any closer to him. He asked me why and, for the first time, the story came out of me, fully formed.

The night I was raped at 15 years old, I did not consider going to a hospital or to the police. I did not even consider telling my parents or my closest friends. This is despite the fact that my rape would have been one of the easier ones to prosecute – I was covered in bruises, snaked across my abdomen from where he had pushed me against a wall. My gymnastics coach told me later, on inspecting my body after I lied to him about a bad fall, that he suspected I had a few broken ribs.

I was raped as a teenager. Here is why I didn’t consider going to the police | Lucia Osborne-Crowley

The statistics betray the horrible truth of just how severely rape survivors are gaslighted in Australia
www.theguardian.com
 
The Labour party hasn't been ringing with denunciations of the Attorney General. Bit more circumspect.
The facts are, and always were, that there are plenty of examples of harassment and abuse in Labour politics.

Female Labor staffers share details of workplace sexual harassment and abuse

Women in a closed social media group of 1,300 current and former Labor staffers say men in the party must be ‘held to account’ for their actions
www.theguardian.com
 
Interesting observation about ScoMo's response to the women outside Parliament house.

Tatiana Andersen
@tatiandersen
·
22m

Scott Morrison opens his #qt speech on #March4Justice with this: "not far from here, such marches, even now, are being met with bullets, but not here in this country". If you thought the bar couldn't get any lower we're at the 'just be glad we're not shooting you' stage #auspol
 

I don't blame Morrison for not meeting them outside, it's hard to discuss matters civilly with a mob especially when they are riled up by emotion.

He gave them a chance to meet in quieter circumstances and they refused, which I think was fairly silly.
 
What a weird case. Former Army officer keeps 'slaves', but the women say it was consensual.

Do they deserve what they got ?

Felicity was kept as a 'slave', caged and tattooed. Now she wants her 'master' held accountable

On an isolated rural property in New South Wales, a man has been keeping six women as sex slaves. One of his former partners is speaking out in a bid to help them and encourage others to come forward. Warning: This story contains descriptions of extreme violence and sexual abuse.
www.abc.net.au
 
Maybe. Maybe however women have seen just how pointless going the "right" way has been historically.

  • The dropping of the Brittany Higgins case into the back drawer.
  • The drawn out police processes that just ...don't... happen.
  • The undermining/gaslighting of victims and their friends when any such cases are raised to destroy their credibility
  • The continued behaviours of public officials with no effective way to challenge them.
  • The fact that investigations into events long past still have no actions. See below
Morrison went on to say:

Amy Remeikis has very astutely pointed out over on the politics live blog that the government has had this report for over a year and has yet to respond.

-----------------------------------------------------
Winner of the Best sign at the Rally outside Parliament.

I'm 12 and I'm already sick of this xhit"
carried by a 12 year old.

Women's March 4 Justice: Brittany Higgins addresses Canberra protest as crowds mass in Sydney and Melbourne – as it happened

Tens of thousands of people marched in Canberra, Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane to demand action in response to allegations of workplace abuse
www.theguardian.com
 
Last edited:
I'll suggest that the words of yours which I've quoted here are correct as a standalone statement.

That is, they don't mention sexual assault and there's no need to since, and this is my point, they apply to a drastically wider range of issues covering all manner of subjects.

That's not to downplay the seriousness of sexual assault but in truth that's only the tip of the iceberg. The problem runs far deeper than that alone.....

Suffice to say I'm 100% certain of my comments there.
 

you've seemed 100% percent certain of many of your comments about an array of subjects here.
Suffice to say, you're very close to being 100% wrong in that regard. I see no orphan here. As a rule you are just a bad judge...... period.
I'm no Nostradamus, but nor should I need to be, You are an easy predict every time.
 
Clansman said:
you've seemed 100% percent certain of many of your comments about an array of subjects here.
Suffice to say, you're very close to being 100% wrong in that regard. I see no orphan here. As a rule you are just a bad judge...... period.
Click to expand...

Your comment is somewhat amusing given that a substantial number of my posts specifically state that doubt exists, that there are uncertainties and so on. Something that any successful investor or trader will be well aware of - there's always doubt, nothing is certain indeed that's the very nature of markets.

In regard to the specific incidents to which I am referring, I'll simply stand back and watch what happens with that one.

For the avoidance of doubt however, I will state firmly that I am not an accused person.
 
Last edited:

You need to edit your post and remove the "any successful investor or trader will be aware of" part.
It's a contradiction in terms to include that in relation to any of your posts.
 

Well there we are. All we need to do to establish what is "right" is

1) Take the opposite view to Smurf
2) Follow our new guru Clansman.

No need for experience, logic, analysis or other references.
 
basilio said:
Well there we are. All we need to do to establish what is "right" is

1) Take the opposite view to Smurf
2) Follow our new guru Clansman.

No need for experience, logic, analysis or other references.
Click to expand...
I'll simply observe that opposing views are valuable and intelligent people actively seek to hear and understand the opposing side of an argument. That does not mean that they'll necessarily agree with it, just that they wish to understand it and consider the merits of the argument put forward.

Attempting to silence the other side by means of personal attacks is a tactic that has a great deal of relevance to the thread subject for all the wrong reasons.
 
Everyone agrees that something should be done, but what ?

In my view if a bloke is convicted of violence against women they have proven themselves to be a threat and would be likely to reoffend.

I reckon , once convicted they need to be monitored electronically indefinitely after their release.

This would obviously be a deterrent to offending in the first place, as well as a safety measure for other women.

Women also have to realise that more convictions are needed so these low lifes don't get to repeat their crimes.

That means faster reporting so that the necessary evidence can be collected , rather than relying on verbal evidence later on.
 
SirRumpole said:
In my view if a bloke is convicted of violence against women they have proven themselves to be a threat and would be likely to reoffend.
Click to expand...
Personally I'd remove the gender specific aspect since the problem is the crime not the gender of the people involved.

Assault is assault and harassment is harassment whether the victim is male, female or gender non-binary.

Assault against animals likewise. The silent, unheard from victims of much domestic violence sadly.

Once it becomes gender specific, it turns into a male versus female debate and misses the point that the problem is the crime not the gender.
 

Yes, sure by all means. The vast majority of dv's are perpetrated by men but not all so I'm quite happy to go "genderless" in this debate.
 
SirRumpole said:
Yes, sure by all means. The vast majority of dv's are perpetrated by men but not all so I'm quite happy to go "genderless" in this debate.
Click to expand...
To put some figures on it:

The 2016 ABS Personal Safety Survey (PSS) estimated that 17% of women and 4.3% of men have experienced at least one sexual assault since the age of 15.

Whilst male victims are clearly less common than female victims, it would be an injustice to dismiss the effect of such assaults on the estimated 385,000 male victims (there being 1.6 million female victims).

Same with any minority issue. Eg disabled people, Aboriginals and homosexuals are all examples of minorities but I doubt that anyone would seriously suggest that a crime committed against them ought be dismissed simply on that basis of being a minority.

More recent data is somewhat closer in terms of the gender of victims with the PSS estimating 148,000 women and 57,200 men had been sexually assaulted at least once in the 12 months prior to the survey. Men are still a minority of victims but a pretty substantial one.

For offenders it's more clear cut, 97% being male, but at the risk of stating the obvious (and this is where these sort of debates tend to derail) that doesn't mean 97% of men are a danger to the community. If 1.1% of adults have been sexually assaulted in the past 12 months, and 97% of the offenders were male, then that means at least 97.9% of men were not an offender.

To the extent that offenders have more than one victim, that 97.9% of men not offending would be even higher. That is, the majority of men are not offenders despite the majority of offenders being men. Point being to stop the criminals, not to punish the innocent, and not to dismiss victims outside the most common scenarios.

From this: https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/03...-d54c74fa601a/aihw-fdv-5.pdf.aspx?inline=true
 
SirRumpole said:
Yes, sure by all means. The vast majority of dv's are perpetrated by men but not all so I'm quite happy to go "genderless" in this debate.
Click to expand...
That is true because dv is usually of a physical nature, I wonder how many spouses are driven to suicide by mental abuse?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
West Papua
Replies
3
Views
4K
Odduna
O
R
IRAQ: the Big (neo) Con
Replies
1
Views
5K
basilio
R
The American use of War Pretext Incidents
Replies
6
Views
9K
sptrawler
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...