<p>Our attended junior and high schools have included these discussions in what I feel was a rational and non-finger pointing manner . . . as part of the sex education program. My child feels that it was waaaaaaay more information than was necessary. In fact the sex education programs worked really well, they turned my child off to the entire idea so much that I have been informed that there will never be grandchildren. LOL!</p>
<p>No Jewish program would EVER discourage grandchildren ;)</p>
<p>Back in ES and MS, Ds found it absolutely DISGUSTING to think of H and I actually doing “that”!!!
Have not checked with them on this lately, though…</p>
<p>One D has gone from wanting 7 children to none; the other never discusses with me, but has already asked one of her friends to be the god-mother!!! (Please, not too soon!!!)</p>
<p>Yes, I saw the preliminary guidelines, and while I haven’t followed the whole thread, I am concerned about these shades of grey. Seems like its hard to prove a negative (i.e “no, I didn’t do want I am being accused of doing”).</p>
<p>** Yes, BBD, in the work environment a person is supposed to tell the coworker/supervisor/whatever that their behavior is making them uncomfortable. Is that the same in the college environment? If our sons smile at a girl or put their arm on their shoulder, will they get accused of harassment?</p>
<p>** I reread the " letter" to colleges, which references sexual “violence” (rape, sexual assault, sexual battery, and sexual coercion) but doesn’t seem to mention harassment. Does this mean that, again for arguments sake, if a girl is angry and wants to falsely accuse a guy, she should skip the harassment allegation and go right to battery? Could/should brushing up against a coed, especially if accidental, or staring/glaring at a girl be considered battery?</p>
<p>“Does this mean that, again for arguments sake, if a girl is angry and wants to falsely accuse a guy, she should skip the harassment allegation and go right to battery?”</p>
<p>I think discussing what a womans ideal strategy for falsely accusing a man would be, would lead to an unbalanced view of the pros and cons of existing rules, vs alternative rules. You are of course free to speculate, but I am not going to suggest such a strategy. </p>
<p>If you actually have sons, I dont think you need to worry about them being disciplined for smiling at a girl. If you are truely concerned, I suggest contacting the University in question.</p>
<p>I assume you are being non-responsive because no one can set such “policy” with out a specific example /case to address. And IMO its absurd to assume that if a guy puts his arm around a girl she is going to accuse him of sexual battery. That said, it has become a sad day that many teachers can no longer comfort an upset elementary student with a hug for fear of accusation of inappropriate contact.</p>
<p>perhaps this will help you </p>
<p>[ED/OCR:</a> Sexual Harassment: It’s Not Academic Pamphlet.](<a href=“Archived: ED/OCR: Sexual Harassment: It's Not Academic Pamphlet.”>Archived: ED/OCR: Sexual Harassment: It's Not Academic Pamphlet.)</p>
<p>“Example: A high school athletic coach hugs a student who makes a goal. This by itself is not considered sexual conduct. However, a coach’s hugging of a student could be considered sexual conduct if it is unwelcome and occurs under inappropriate circumstances.”</p>
<p>That school systems go beyond the law in fear, is not particulary OCR’s fault. </p>
<p>of course this is about colleges, not elementary schools. </p>
<p>I believe I was being appropriately responsive given the content and tone of your question.</p>
<p>I was giving the example of elementary students, BBD, not HS students, where (for the elementary kids) it is typically the parent who makes accusations of inappropriate touching. But we are getting away from what was my earlier hypothetical-- in response to several posters’s implication that boys are bad/evil/to be blamed and girls are innocent/blameless. The question remains, how does an accused prove a negative?</p>
<p>I can remember a teacher around 1995 who was particularly touchie, feelie with the kids and
thinking that he was crazy given what was then the prevailing thought on student/teacher contact.</p>
<p>I was giving the example of elementary students, BBD, not HS students, where it is typically the parent who makes accusations of inappropriate touching. "</p>
<p>Im not aware that HS students dont make such accusations. </p>
<p>"But we are getting away from what was my earlier hypothetical-- in response to several posters’s implication that boys are bad/evil/to be blamed and girls are innocent/blameless. "</p>
<p>Do you mean POIH? if so, it would be well to name him. Because I dont think anyone else has stated or even implied that. I do not beleive most boys are bad or evil. I also do not think most boys would have sex with an obviously inebriated girl (I MAY be naive here). </p>
<p>"The question remains, how does an accused prove a negative? "</p>
<p>Irrelevant, as thats not what preponderance of evidence means.</p>
<p>Yes, my original comments were in response to the poster(s) who were making (as have been in the past) the “boys are pigs and must have had poor parenting” accusations. If you thought they were in response to a post of yours, you misunderstood.</p>
<p>It is hardly irrelevant to address the stress, the emotional and potentially financial strain of defending against a false accusation (hmm… Duke lacrosse come to mind…)</p>
<p>Yes, its is most sad that many schools systems have chosen to error on the side of extreme caution. The students and the teachers both lose.</p>
<p>And if, for example again, Tracy or Daisy give a gentleman a therapeutic massage and when the gentleman turns over , he inadvertently touches the massage therapist in a way that was not intentioned, what should he do if he is being falsely accused of inappropriate touching? I would be curious to hear back from the posters who seem to feel that all guys are bad and girls are victims.</p>
<p>“It is hardly irrelevant to address the stress, the emotional and potentially financial strain of defending against a false accusation (hmm… Duke lacrosse come to mind…)”</p>
<p>Which is true in regard to any false accusation, criminal or civil. In the case of civil procedure (which is what is at issue in this thread, where unlike the duke lacrosse team case, criminal penalties are not involved) to imply that preponderance of evidence means the accused must prove their innocence, is misleading. The plaintiff gives there evidence, the defendant theirs. In a pure he said/she said case, other than evidence of charecter, there wouldnt be much to add. If there are cases where someone has suffered expulsion from school based on a pure he said she said with no reason to think one more credible than the other, well provide the links please. The abundantly discussed case above was not like that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said all boys are evil and all girls are innocent but in any sexual encounter of this sort the fault always lie with the boys.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re naive if you think the Duke lacrosse team was innocent and it was victim’s fault.
The same situation happened with DeAnza baseball team with same verdict.
You must be considerate about IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn’s emotional and potential financial strain defending against the accusation.</p>
<p>That’s what the whole issue, we jump to blame the victim.</p>
<p>Those overgeneralizations are ridiculous, POIH. The fault does not ALWAYS lie with the male, and I was specifically NOT giving an example of rape, but suggesting other situations in which a person could be accused of battery. Should an innocent recipient of a massage be shaken down for more money, POIH, or should he profess his innocence and complain to other potential patrons? Does the fault lie with the male in my example, or is he an “innocent victim”?</p>
<p>I do not wish to rehash the Duke LAX case, but merely used it as an example of what happens, emotionally and financially, to some people who have to defend against false allegations.</p>
<p>Jym, you read the Dear Colleague letter or the background doc? </p>
<p>Teachers ARE allowed to hug an elementary kid, in context. Omg, that is also covered. See the former links for the background doc and letter (page 3) and the Guidelines doc comes later.</p>
<p>jym626: You are twisting the situation. College is not a massage parlour and nor do the social gatherings.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If an act have been comitted then there are no false allegations. It’s just who have the more financial and social power.</p>
<p>I can bet if the race of the Duke Lacrosse team and the victim were reversed we would have a different verdict under the same circumstances.</p>
<p>“No Jewish program would EVER discourage grandchildren”
Excellent excellent, he shoots, he scores again!</p>
<p>but you see the problem wasn’t that the program had any intention of discouraging grandchildren, it was that the information, especially the part about the dangers of STDs etc (did I mention germ avoidance issues?) that was the turn off. The program was quite good just in my little one’s mind a bit too comprehensive. As I remember it the comment was “all I need to know right now is that there’s going to be some hair in some new places.” I will admit that I haven’t heard this comment for a few years now so I’m holding out hope that mother nature will overcome and there’s hope for grandkids (as are Grandma and Grandpa)…</p>
<p>I was giving a different example, following some of the “boys are to blame” comments, yes, not a college campus example, wehre a guy might be accused of something that was unintentional. I said it was for arguments sake. Can you imagine a situation where that could occur?</p>
<p>And yes, LF, teachers may be “allowed” to hug an elementary school kid, but many are feeling it necessary to err on the side of caution and do not do so. No one likes their action to be misconstrued and to be falsely accused of something they did not do.</p>
<p>"And if, for example again, Tracy or Daisy give a gentleman a therapeutic massage and when the gentleman turns over , he inadvertently touches the massage therapist in a way that was not intentioned, what should he do if he is being falsely accused of inappropriate touching? I would be curious to hear back from the *posters *who seem to feel that all guys are bad and girls are victims. "</p>
<p>Is there more than one? </p>
<p>Sexual harassment CAN apply to a client in an employment context - but Im pretty sure in a case of a licensed message parlor, it would be treated as something requiring complaint, etc to qualify as sexual harrasment. And the remedy is not, AFAIK, on the client, but on the employer who must take appropriate actions to make sure the client does not repeat the acts and create a hostile climate.</p>
<p>Battery of course is a CRIME apart from harassment, and as such has criminal penalties even when done once, but that would require criminal standards of proof.</p>
<p>EDITED</p>
<p>[Revised</a> Sexual Harassment Guidance](<a href=“Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance”>Revised Sexual Harassment Guidance)
** this is the one tsdad supplied- dated 2001- </p>
<p>2001 states : …or a kindergarten teacher’s consoling hug for a child with a skinned knee will not be considered sexual harassment.</p>
<p>Background doc
<a href=“http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...l_violence.pdf[/url]”>http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defa...l_violence.pdf</a>
Dear Colleague Letter
<a href=“http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/lis...gue-201104.pdf[/url]”>http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/lis...gue-201104.pdf</a></p>