Survey on sexual harassment and sexual assault in climbing

OrganicChemistry wrote:

You could start off by showing respect by capitalizing his name. Since you can clearly all caps and capitalize sentences it seems odd his name isn't. 

I believe I was showing respect by referring to him exactly as he chooses to refer to himself, and not presuming to alter his name to suit my own capitalization preferences. But thanks for the condescension, yes of course I know how to capitalize things. 

Nate Ball wrote: To wonderwoman, OLH, Lena, Em... you obviously don't need my blessing, but I just wanted to post in support of what you're doing in this thread and what you're doing for the MP forums as a whole. Thanks for trying to keep the conversation civil. Your patience and tact are superhuman. Hopefully examples like yours will encourage more women to interact in the forums.

Thanks for the words of support. As has happened every time I've participated in a similar conversation, I've started receiving a handful of private messages from women letting me know they're following the conversation, thanking me for speaking up - and always these are names I don't recognize from the forums, so presumably women who are here, reading, but still not choosing (for whatever reason) to participate publicly. Take that for what it's worth, but I wanted to let it be known for the record that they're here. 

Replies to various stuff while I was out earning my keep:

First, Frank and I are friends, not close, but enough we've been chatting. He is locked out. For the record, I will say again, I wish he had not had his reasonable post deleted. Axing opinions does not further conversation, it shuts it down.

The other thing that can shut down reasoned discourse? Exactly what Frank was trying to say: nit picking every possibility for offense. In the great post above, lena laid out how these innocently meant remarks can go wrong. Real people, aiming for real conversations, can and should go back and find out what went wrong. On the internet? Maybe not. Every time? No. But, if I burst into tears right in front of you? You bet your ass you should care, and, I should be "man" enough to let you know what went wrong.

But see, Frank and I, as ancients, have watched this polarization over, and over, and over. It serves no purpose, except to keep us lobbing grenades in each other's camps while nothing changes.

When we talk to each other? As neighbors, friends, climbers, parents? Stuff quietly changes. I've also had the great pleasure if watching that happen, over and over and over. It's hard to stay racist when your daughter has made friends with the nice little black kid down the street. Or, your attitude may shift when you realize two lady coworkers you like and respect are married. On and on.

I was flat out threatened with blackmail sorta recently on here, by a regular. It was so astonishing, and so over the top, I immediately backed off, not even knowing how I had offended, and apologized publicly and privately. I still have no idea what the back story was on that, but their hurt was clear. If we ever meet in person, perhaps I will hear that story, but it isn't necessary.

Nate, thanks. Some good ladies on here, I'd love to meet them, and, gee, the gents too.

I have also had pm's from people, female and male also. I also try to contact people and let them know their voice is appreciated, including, maybe especially, when it gets heated and/or mean. I'm ancient, already faced far, far worse than you people, so it costs me nothing, and I've made heaps of friends.

Last? I chose Old Lady H, and only later gifted you all with my name, Helen. Sunday, I went climbing with my partners who include a toddler and a great little boy. He is supposed to call me miss Helen. Yesterday, miss old lady popped out. Hilarious! His dad let him know that was not my name, but my MP handle.

"Old lady" is very specifically to rub society's nose in their expectations of what a woman my age is "supposed" to be. I am proud of my old! She rocks! Okay, hobbles right now...shitass knee did not get the memo.

Best, Helen

Frank is out of time-out

wonderwoman wrote:
However, I do not think it is okay or helpful to create a supportive environment for people who are nostalgic for the days where they were able to make jokes about sexual harassment. .

Who gets to decide what topics are off limits for jokes?  Why should sexual harassment be given priviledged status in this regard?  Is it not possible to be 100% against sexual harassment in all its forms, in both thought and act, yet still be able to crack a joke (or laugh at one) on this topic?  What about jokes on other sensitive topics?  

wonderwoman wrote:

Where this is a women’s forum & about 50% of the population around you is walking around with PTSD from some form of sexual harassment, there should be a zero tolerance policy for these types of jokes in this forum.  

There are plenty of safe spaces on the internet for sexual harassment jokes, and worse.  Some of them are bredding grounds for incels who are taking up arms.

I am sick of accommodating sexual harassment & the accompanying jokes for the sake of making someone comfortable.  I am also groweind weary of repeating this statement every 3 posts in this forum.  

As someone who has himself has experienced both sexual harassment from women and sexual abuse from a man, I appreciate this sentiment.  But suggesting that making a joke about this topic is in any way related to the incel "movement" is just wrong.  

It seems to me you were making a blanket statement against a certain kind of joke, rather than an argument that these jokes are inappropriate for this forum.  If I have that wrong, I apologize since I do understand the forum argument. 

Marc801 C wrote:

https://file.scirp.org/pdf/OJEpi_2015070913284831.pdf

Interesting, in my laymans reading of that it seems we need one or more of these three things to turn this survey into something useful:
- Population data
- Non-participant data
- Variable associated with selection

I don't see any mention of existing climbing population data on sexual harrassment and assault in climbing, and I don't see any mention of collecting the non-participant data either.
Now the variable associated with selection...I'm guessing thats unknowable? Who knows what motivates people to self select themselves for this particular survey.

wonderwoman wrote:

First off, I am sorry that you were subject to sexual harassment and abuse.  

Meh, live and learn.  We all have to go through bad shit to realize we need to be careful around certain kinds of people, especially when there is potential for mental and physical intimidation.  As others have noted in this thread, this is generally a MUCH bigger challenge for women than men, but it can definitely go both ways.

Second, for the sake of not screaming myself hoarse, this is going to be my canned response to this topic:

I hear what you are saying, and respect your viewpoint.  I just have a different perspective.

The beautiful thing about the MP forums is the #1 rule: don't be a jerk.  Really, this is the only rule we need in the forums, and in life (the golden rule, right?).  A big part of not being a jerk is being able to hear others' points of view without rejecting their experiences or mocking their perspectives, and also not turning every perceived transgression into a fight.  This is what seems to have happened with regard to the earlier joke, and I just wanted to offer another point of view.

wonderwoman wrote: OLH - I admire your loyalty & compassion.  You are obviously a good person who has lived a very interesting, and challenging, life.  

However, I do not think it is okay or helpful to create a supportive environment for people who are nostalgic for the days where they were able to make jokes about sexual harassment. & no one called them out on it.  Age of your friend is no excuse. 

What is worse, IMO, is that the joke-maker is now comfortably falling into the role of the victim while the rest of us who have actually & commonly been the target of sexual assault & harassment  move on with our lives as survivors.

Let him lick his wounds & return when he can refrain from making these types of comments.  And if your friend, or anyone else, continues to explain to the rest of us why sexual harassment jokes are funny, expect some of us to continue to call them out on it.  

It’s not okay.  It’s not funny.  But Frank (capitalized, or otherwise) will be okay in the end.

Hey, we don't disagree at all, wonderwoman. I was not clear, or you misread my post. Frank and I are not at all nostalgic for the "good ol days", not remotely. That crap is slowly going away because of people like Frank and I quietly chipping away at it, or, pulling out the howitzers now and then. 

I was referring not to the joke, that was well answered already, but to his (deleted) response. The act of deleting a reasonable response dumps people into the camp of the Other. Us versus Them. That, is what he and I were talking about, and have seen happen, especially lately. People use small things to demonize the Other, forgetting that there is much common ground that we can stand together on, and make progress. It's very frustrating. If you're annoyed, think how annoyed us oldsters are, many decades in. Frank and I have been fighting fights for forty plus years, so our kids and grandkids have it better.

For the record, my phone has made all decisions on caps or no for names and thrown in/changed a few random words as well. I think it's an anarchist.

Best, Helen

I've been reading through these posts and what surprises me most is that the joke was about being old, which I am, not about sexual harassment and that so many don't get that.  It's like last week when I was ID'd for buying a bottle of wine and thought it was pretty funny.  As for the kind of person I am; I'll let those who actually know me and those whose lives I've affected be my legacy.   And that's all I have to say about this.

wonderwoman wrote:

1) Where this is a women’s forum & about 50% of the population around you is walking around with PTSD from some form of sexual harassment, there should be a zero tolerance policy for these types of jokes in this forum.  

2)I am sick of accommodating sexual harassment & the accompanying jokes for the sake of making someone comfortable.  I am also growing weary of repeating this statement every 3 posts in this forum.  

1) Got some citations on data about that? Or is that something you just made up to add to your credibility? (tongue in cheek)
2) You have been wearing the ruby slippers all along.

Look, I'm not down with the harassment, and I don't think it is funny.  
But making stuff up is what leads to things like Trump getting elected, and what makes people sick enough of one form of BS to participate in another.
It just makes you look ridiculous, and by contagion, anyone else who holds your position can start looking bad, so please cut it out.

Nate Tastic wrote:PTSD? Are you trying to make a point or are you being serious? That seems like a bit of a stretch. I know people with PTSD. For example, one had his limb blown off (literally melted off) and 70%~ of his skin burned to the point where it looked liked Freddy Krueger's face. He was the only person who made it out alive, of 5 soldiers and this after an IDE blew up their Bradley in Iraq. 
I'm not trying to discount sexual harassment but, we already had one person say mansplaining = rape so, I just want to make sure I'm not misunderstanding your perspective. Maybe you know something I don't? 

I don’t want to speak for my wife, but you can get PTSD from anything traumatic. This doesn’t need to be a pissing contest about who had a more traumatic experience. I know this has already been said, but, rule #1 is don’t be a jerk. Instead of defending your (your as a group, not necessarily you) comment if someone takes offense to it, listen and try to understand what it is that may be hurtful to them or others. Then, instead of doubling down and rejecting their point of view, accept it and apologize. Don’t be a jerk. 

Old lady H wrote:

Hey, we don't disagree at all, wonderwoman. I was not clear, or you misread my post. Frank and I are not at all nostalgic for the "good ol days", not remotely. That crap is slowly going away because of people like Frank and I quietly chipping away at it, or, pulling out the howitzers now and then. 

I was referring not to the joke, that was well answered already, but to his (deleted) response. The act of deleting a reasonable response dumps people into the camp of the Other. Us versus Them. That, is what he and I were talking about, and have seen happen, especially lately. People use small things to demonize the Other, forgetting that there is much common ground that we can stand together on, and make progress. It's very frustrating. If you're annoyed, think how annoyed us oldsters are, many decades in. Frank and I have been fighting fights for forty plus years, so our kids and grandkids have it better.

Yep.  And people who make up statistics are not infrequently the people who create strawmen.  In fact, I read somewhere (wink) that there is a 1:1 correlation.
In all seriousness, it is the sort of thing that creates vitriol and tribal conflicts.

Nate Ball wrote: To wonderwoman, OLH, Lena, Em... you obviously don't need my blessing, but I just wanted to post in support of what you're doing in this thread and what you're doing for the MP forums as a whole. Thanks for trying to keep the conversation civil. Your patience and tact are superhuman. Hopefully examples like yours will encourage more women to interact in the forums.

Thank you for pointing this out.  I am also grateful that some women have the courage to post.

But you see why it is so difficult.  Wonderwoman just posted some important statistics about PTSD and how these things affect women.  This is what the study is trying to show, to put numbers to the pain and what men do.  But men are already attacking wonderwoman and saying she is wrong.   That is why more women do not post because they cannot say what is true.  This is supposed to be a place for women to speak but still women are being attacked. 

Some numbers:

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/02/21/587671849/a-new-survey-finds-eighty-percent-of-women-have-experienced-sexual-harassment

I don't know what wonderwoman's source is.  I do know that the correlation between sexual harassment and PTSD has been made in numerous studies and for some time now.  Here is one random reference from a lazy internet search:

https://www.livescience.com/16949-sexual-harassment-health-effects.html

"women in the military who are sexually harassed are up to four times as likely to develop PTSD as women exposed to a traumatic event in combat, according to a 2009 study in the journal Law and Human Behavior."

No, I didn't verify the study nor it's sample selection or size.  Like I said, lazy internet search, but it doesn't appear as if she is just totally making this up out of thin air.

señdera la reina wrote:

Thank you for pointing this out.  I am also grateful that some women have the courage to post.

But you see why it is so difficult.  Wonderwoman just posted some important statistics about PTSD and how these things affect women.  This is what the study is trying to show, to put numbers to the pain and what men do.  But men are already attacking wonderwoman and saying she is wrong.   That is why more women do not post because they cannot say what is true.  This is supposed to be a place for women to speak but still women are being attacked. 

I would have hoped that men coming into the women's forum wouldn't have to "ask" for clarification about whether women's trauma is real enough to compare to a war vet who was dismembered and disfigured. I would have hoped that long-time users of this site wouldn't compare the titles women use for the stress they carry due to constant harassment to the blatant lying and manipulation of popular media by Trump and his followers. Unfortunately, this is still the internet, and a male-dominated forum at that. Even a title like "women's forum" isn't explicit enough for these folks to get it. I wish more would be done to own this as a culture the admins are responsible for, intentionally or otherwise. That's why I thank these ladies for what they're doing, because as much as I hope some people just shut up and listen, it's going to take a lot more than that. Very intentional language is important, even if it's a completely one-sided expectation.

Yury wrote:

I am confused.
I understand who distributes this survey and who will process its results.

I do not understand who created and who promoted this survey.

I can't speak to this directly as I did not originate this survey. This might be a good question for Dr. Rennison or the Alpinist editorial staff: alpinist.com/p/alpmag/masthead

Mason Stone wrote: Wonderwoman,
Please qualify what you are calling PTSD, do you mean from having served in a military theatre of conflict?

PTSD can arise from *any* traumatic incident - it has nothing to do with military conflict.

Alicia Sokolowski wrote: I don't know what wonderwoman's source is.  I do know that the correlation between sexual harassment and PTSD has been made in numerous studies and for some time now.  Here is one random reference from a lazy internet search:

https://www.livescience.com/16949-sexual-harassment-health-effects.html

"women in the military who are sexually harassed are up to four times as likely to develop PTSD as women exposed to a traumatic event in combat, according to a 2009 study in the journal Law and Human Behavior."

No, I didn't verify the study nor it's sample selection or size.  Like I said, lazy internet search, but it doesn't appear as if she is just totally making this up out of thin air.

Yes you see it is not hard to find the truth.  Sexual harassment causes four times more PTSD than war does.