
No Appearance of Impropriety - Mz
http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2017/07/no-appearance-of-impropriety.html
======
captainmuon
Stories like this make me glad to live in Germany. Things are by no means
perfect, we have the same cases of sexism, harrasment and scandals as
everybody else. But it would never occur to me that it is inappropriate to be
alone with a female colleague at work. When this topic came up at a mixed
American/German lunch round at work (in the US), and someone said you
shouldn't close the door if a woman and a man are alone in an office, the
Germans literally did a spit take.

In fact, not treating women exactly like your male colleages would be
considered backwards and offensive by many women, rather than considerate or
appropriate.

But it also works the other way around. If you think something is
inappropriate when women are around, then it is inapproprate, period. What I
mean is this kind of old boys attitude / bro jokes / casual sexism. This is
actually a pretty endemic problem here (they speak of Altherrenwitze = old
men's jokes), but at least it is considered inappropriate nowadays. But that
is about the maximal extent of "inappropriateness". To see something wrong in
sharing a car or having lunch alone with a member of the opposite sex reminds
most people here of Saudi Arabia, I would say.

~~~
mikestew
_Things are by no means perfect, we have the same cases of sexism, harrasment
and scandals as everybody else. But it would never occur to me that it is
inappropriate to be alone with a female colleague at work._

How believable would a claim of sexual harassment be if everyone you asked
said, "I have never known him to be behind a closed door with any woman but
his wife"? I mean, that's the point of the article, right? Folks spun all
kinds of rumors about the first century Christians. Peter admonished them to
live such that anyone hearing those rumors would laugh them off as ridiculous.
Ever wonder why Billy Graham was never caught in some sex scandal while his
peers all around him were? He was never alone in a room with a woman other
than his wife. (And, without personally knowing the man, it probably helped if
he never had sex with anyone but his wife as well.)

You acknowledge the same scandals as in the U. S., and yet I don't understand
how it's all weird and shit, like "Saudi Arabia". Estimate for yourself how
many of those cases wouldn't exist had the parties involved gave not even the
appearance of impropriety. Let's say, hypothetically, one party accuses the
other of sexual harassment. And, because we've been temporarily granted
psychic powers, we know the accused didn't do anything of the sort. Well, if
there have been a lot of closed-door meetings and one-on-one sessions at the
bar, some people are going to believe the rumors.

And it's not just sex. I've known a number of church pastors over the years,
and to a man and woman they'll tell you they never touch the church money.
Easy to shoot down rumors of dipping out of the collection plate if no one can
say they've ever seen they pastor touch a single dollar bill. Of those that do
count the money, I've always seen two people in the room. It squelches rumors,
and probably most importantly, removes the temptation. Whereas I've been
reading a surprising number of stories over the past year of children's
soccer/football and baseball leagues losing tens of thousands from
unaccountable team treasurers embezzling the funds.

Some people are going to believe the rumor regardless, that's just the way
they roll. Others will need a little convincing. My advice is not to give them
any more ammo than necessary.

~~~
captainmuon
I guess people here are less afraid of false accusations, and more of 1)
actual wrongdoing, and 2) creating wierd rules that they feel are sexist or
anachronistic.

Just to insure myself against potential false allegations of affairs or
harrasment doesn't seem to be reason enough to advise that kind of
segregation. Also its a slippery slope: it may start as a precaution, but if
widespread, it becomes semi-mandatory.

The comparison with Saudi Arabia is hyperbolic of course, but I think not too
far fetched. Everywhere where men and women are segregated, the stated
motivation is not misogyny, but to protect women, and some kind of decency. It
only ever looks wrong from the outside.

------
draw_down
I used to work for a company that sells investment advice. The company has
practices and tools in place to ensure that employees do not engage in insider
trading. However, in addition to not allowing that to happen (because it's
illegal, duh), the company aimed for this same standard - not even an
appearance of impropriety.

I too thought of this concept during the recent scandals. It's why some people
are suggesting no one-on-one meetings ever between a man and a woman who are
engaged (or potentially engaged) in a power relation like investment or
employment. I don't know enough about this world to say whether that will
hinder women entrepreneurs' progress, or how it could be done to avoid that,
but I think this concept is important.

And for whatever it's worth, if I end up walking behind or near a woman, in
many cases but particularly at night, I will cross the street for the same
reason.

------
m0llusk
This kind of thing makes me think that remote work must be the future. Have
everything in writing, interact when necessary for business, do the work, and
avoid common everyday interactions and meals with people. The current popular
belief is that forcing everyone to smell the fish that someone just microwaved
will help their companies prosper, but all this negative energy over casual
contact seems to indicate that operating a company in a way that is socially
sanitary may be more helpful and less likely to generate liabilities than
operating as a kind of social pressure cooker and reactor.

~~~
xupybd
Face to face interactions can build stronger working relationships. I'd be
slow to discount the importance of working directly with your co-workers.

------
didgeoridoo
Mz is on a roll recently. Can't say I'm complaining.

