Women training with men

[DragonMind]

Seriously, these guys aren't harassing anyone, they aren't innuendo. More like off color expletives or allusions. Nothing demeaning, seriously. In fact, the folks I have dealt with have been really good folks, that's part of why she wants to go workout with them.

Sorry, but you're wrong. Harassment is comprised of two primary types: quid pro quo or hostile environment. Everyone generally recognizes quid pro quo harassment (e.g. sex to keep your job), but hostile environment is actually the more common. All it takes for a hostile environment complaint is someone finding the behavior offensive, notifying management and their failure to deal with it. They need to clean up their act since they're open to the public. Good folks or not, they're exposing themselves to problems that can close a school.

[dao]

When I started BJJ most of the guys were used to using off-color language in class. Whenever they used language that bothered I would suddenly go deaf and ignore them - sometimes I literally turned my back on them. They quickly got the message and cleaned up their language. I don't know if this would work for everyone but, was pretty effective.

[rgoad]

Fascinating.

Yin

When I started BJJ most of the guys were used to using off-color language in class. Whenever they used language that bothered I would suddenly go deaf and ignore them - sometimes I literally turned my back on them. They quickly got the message and cleaned up their language. I don't know if this would work for everyone but, was pretty effective.

and Yang.

All it takes for a hostile environment complaint is someone finding the behavior offensive, notifying management and their failure to deal with it. They need to clean up their act since they're open to the public.

Thanks for the advice. Good point, Barry. Excellent, actually. This is a case of 'locker room talk' that is controllable. Debra's technique should get the message across and these are actually really good folks that will get the hint. I am not concerned that my daughter will not find it in herself to to address this, but only that she have some techniques to use. This is similar to a work situation she could encounter where she needs to be 'firm, but friendly', uncompromising. It's a growth opportunity for her and I'm just looking for some advice.
Ironically, she has no problem with aggression on the mat. In fact, she gets upset more quickly if she thinks someone is taking it easy on her because she's a girl. That's the only time I have ever seen her put her finger in someone's chest.
I don't think she will feel threatened by any language, but I don't think she should have to tolerate it if she does not like it.

[DragonMind]

Deb is the hopeless optimist who thinks men actually take hints and are sensitive to subtlety. I've tried to explain to her that men only ever think about two things: a beer and seeing something naked. OK, three things: a beer, seeing something naked, and playing with toys.

Seriously, someone just needs to clue them in that it is far easier to prevent the problem of violating Title VII or IX than it is to defend against a complaint. In court, even if you win you can lose. Plus, taking steps to try to prevent it can work in your favor in court.

[dao]

Let's see:
hopeless - yes
optimistic - sometimes
subtle - hmmmmm I don't think I've ever been called that

I dealt with it non-vebally but, I suspect I was anything but, subtle - and most importantly it worked

[DragonMind]

Optimist - someone who thinks we live in the best of all possible worlds
Pessimist - someone who'se afraid the Optimist is right

or

Optimist - a Pessimist with no experience
Pessimist - a Cynic without enough experience

[howard]

...All it takes for a hostile environment complaint is someone finding the behavior offensive, notifying management and their failure to deal with it. They need to clean up their act since they're open to the public. Good folks or not, they're exposing themselves to problems that can close a school.

Barry, having spent (too) many years in large corporations, I recognized this language right away - it's from "Diversity".

I've seen my share of hostile environment complaints at old jobs. I myself was once almost the subject of one for innocently referring to a woman as "Oriental". A young Korean woman colleague took offense, saying that "Oriental" was now a racial slur, and should only be used as an adjective to apply to inanimate nouns like rugs and pottery. Never mind that "Oriental" never had a pejorative meaning (it simply means "from the East") or that it was clear from the situation that I meant absolutely nothing negative. My colleague considered filing a harassment complaint against me because she felt that I had created a hostile environment.

Perhaps it's my age (52), but I find this whole "hostile environment" concept to be way too subjective. In theory, anybody can file an action against anybody else for just about any comment they make. Clearly, there will be cases that are harassment and are intentional. But, there are also lots of cases like the one I've cited above.

Now, for a question: clearly, Diversity and the hostile environment concept are here to stay in the US corporate world. But, I was not aware that this concept applied to private businesses like MA schools which have not adopted such a policy internally (by now probably every major corporation in the US has an internal Diversity policy). Are you saying that even small, private businesses that don't adopt such policies can be subject to litigation for creating a "hostile environment"? If so, what would be the legal basis of such an action?

What about including language in a waiver form that requires new members to acknowledge that certain things that may or do take place in the MA school (e.g., coarse language, considerable physical contact) cannot be considered "hostile" in that environment? Would that protect a school owner?

Sorry if I'm taking this thread too far off topic.

Regards, Howard

[dao]

I am not an expert on this but, as I understand in order for a "hostile work environment" case to prevail in court the person who is offended has to clearly explain what is creating it either to a supervisor or to the person creating it, prefably both. It can only be considered hostile work environment if the complaint is ignored. Cases are based on a reasonable person standard and I could be wrong but, I would agree that merely calling someone Oriental is mainly descriptive (which in my mind is equivalent to calling someone European or African) in itself would not be enough to create a hostile work environment. But, you are right the concept of a hostile work environment is a slipperly legal slope.

[howard]

Hi Debra,

I agree with what you've said. But, you're speaking about the workplace. I suspect that US or state labor laws protect us in the workplace from hostile-environment harassment. I have no complaint about this - it's as it should be, nobody should be harassed at work and not have some remedy available. Having been in the corporate world before such protection existed, I saw my share of distasteful conduct, usually by men, directed at women.

What I'm wondering is if such legal protection now extends to MA schools and other situations outside of the workplace.

Regards, Howard

[Eliz]

.... What about including language in a waiver form that requires new members to acknowledge that certain things that may or do take place in the MA school (e.g., coarse language, considerable physical contact) cannot be considered "hostile" in that environment? Would that protect a school owner?...

Regards, Howard

I am sure [hoping] your thoughts are hypothetical. No exuse should ever be made for obsene language, let alone documentation supporting an environment that condones it. We ALL are guilty of explatives that were better left unsaid, but to brush it off as understandable given the nature of the environment is not acceptable.

As for physical contact, I believe that written language does exist.

[dojo]

I am a woman.

I have sparred with women too (since many are too scared to try with men) and have sparred men too. In the end I like both .. with women I usually do the warm up exercises (those that are practiced in pairs) and some grappling ... am not always keen on rolling with men.

Still I have had some kumite sessions with male partners too and grappling. They are OK. The problem is that my male friends tend to look after me, since they see me as frail, but after I ask them to be a bit more aggressive they adjust.

For a woman, working with men is important. in the end, if need arises, there are many chances that a possible attacker would be a man ...

[howard]

I am sure [hoping] your thoughts are hypothetical. No exuse should ever be made for obsene language, let alone documentation supporting an environment that condones it. We ALL are guilty of explatives that were better left unsaid, but to brush it off as understandable given the nature of the environment is not acceptable.

Yes, my question is hypothetical. I just used coarse (not obscene - there's a difference) language as a possible example.

The broader conceptual question is: are these things the types of things with repsect to which a customer can waive the right to bring litigation.

[rgoad]

Yes, my question is hypothetical. I just used coarse (not obscene - there's a difference) language as a possible example.

The broader conceptual question is: are these things the types of things with repsect to which a customer can waive the right to bring litigation.

I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but I have had legal briefings about things like this and government lawyers tell me that a person can not waive their constitutional rights, so they can sue for harrasment if they want to. But this applies to the school owner, too, who may eject the person for not following the rules as a freedom of association right.

As far as my specific issue gos, the language is not overtly sexual in nature, more scatalogical. In fact, I am convinced my daughter has what it takes to protect her own interests, but I was thinking of some advice on some bon mots she could use incrementally.

This is far less than a legal action.

I am sort of at odds with Eliz on this, too, as a freedom of speach issue. If a person simply splits infinitives with occasional expletives, this is totally different than having the words directed towards ME as adjectives. One is simply poor mental processes, the latter is a threat. MHO only.

[Eliz]

I am sort of at odds with Eliz on this, too, as a freedom of speach issue. If a person simply splits infinitives with occasional expletives, this is totally different than having the words directed towards ME as adjectives. One is simply poor mental processes, the latter is a threat. MHO only.

Understood and respected.

There is a difference between comments that are blurted at the heat of the moment, and comments that are personally directed. I still demand that people keep their blurtings on a PG-13 scale. When competing, it had better be 100% professional.

Obscenity is legally defined as That Which Has No Redeeming Social Value. I am not a lawyer, I am a law school drop out. But this was actually one of my favorite parts of con law. It differs from Freedom of Speech - sometimes it is a huge difference, sometimes it can be very subjective.

Soooooo, if someone goes to the mats holding their leg and screaming one obscenity after another to the air, I can honestly say that person is in pain but their words have absolutely no redeeming social value in expressing that pain. If anything, their chose of expression may only serve to offend. Get where I am coming from?

Howard,
Course language is different, you are right. I will just say loud mouths in general set me on edge. Whether they are baiting their opponent verbally, commenting on techniques DURING a match, or just plain running on at the mouth - they get under my skin.

[howard]

Howard,
Course language is different, you are right. I will just say loud mouths in general set me on edge. Whether they are baiting their opponent verbally, commenting on techniques DURING a match, or just plain running on at the mouth - they get under my skin.

Hi Elizabeth, I agree with you here. Loudmouths are really annoying, in martial arts and in everything else too.

Please realize that I wasn't suggesting that it's ok to be obnoxious and coarse in class just because it might not be illegal. I don't believe it is. I was just asking hypothetical questions.

Regards, Howard

[DragonMind]

Barry, having spent (too) many years in large corporations, I recognized this language right away - it's from "Diversity".

I've seen my share of hostile environment complaints at old jobs. I myself was once almost the subject of one for innocently referring to a woman as "Oriental". A young Korean woman colleague took offense, saying that "Oriental" was now a racial slur, and should only be used as an adjective to apply to inanimate nouns like rugs and pottery. Never mind that "Oriental" never had a pejorative meaning (it simply means "from the East") or that it was clear from the situation that I meant absolutely nothing negative. My colleague considered filing a harassment complaint against me because she felt that I had created a hostile environment.

Perhaps it's my age (52), but I find this whole "hostile environment" concept to be way too subjective. In theory, anybody can file an action against anybody else for just about any comment they make. Clearly, there will be cases that are harassment and are intentional. But, there are also lots of cases like the one I've cited above.

Now, for a question: clearly, Diversity and the hostile environment concept are here to stay in the US corporate world. But, I was not aware that this concept applied to private businesses like MA schools which have not adopted such a policy internally (by now probably every major corporation in the US has an internal Diversity policy). Are you saying that even small, private businesses that don't adopt such policies can be subject to litigation for creating a "hostile environment"? If so, what would be the legal basis of such an action?

What about including language in a waiver form that requires new members to acknowledge that certain things that may or do take place in the MA school (e.g., coarse language, considerable physical contact) cannot be considered "hostile" in that environment? Would that protect a school owner?

Sorry if I'm taking this thread too far off topic.

Regards, Howard

Howard,

I'm not a lawyer either...just been subjected to far more mandatory classes on this than I can count. For many years, I got the double whammy. Most folks have heard of the provisions under Title VII, but since I was at a college, we also fell under Title IX as well. Considering that MA studios bill themselves as educational institutions, an argument could be made that they would fall under Title IX and thus must protect students from a hostile environment. To my knowledge, this has never happened yet, but weirder stuff happens when lawyers get involved.

Yes it applies in the workplace but a hostile environment can be created by anyone (customer, patient, student, etc). Nor does the offended party have to file the charge themselves, someone can complain on their behalf. Deb is right on the money that the prevailing attitude in the courts so far has been that the issue is failure to deal with it once notified. A single off-color joke, using the word "Oriental", etc. does not create a hostile environment in and of itself. The management must be notified of the offensive behavior and not take action or not take reasonable precautions. That "reasonable man" standard comes into play once again.

As I recall, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII and IX are subsections of that law) covers any business with 15 or more employees. Now, before everyone starts going, "I'm a small school so it doesn't apply" there is a potential gotcha in the way we do certain things. You know those assistant teachers you have helping you out? Case law has already found that they can be classified as employees - it doesn't matter if they're paid or not (and bartering IS a form of payment). I can point you to some folks who ran afoul of worker's comp on this. The central point that determined it was if the teaching they did was a regular part of the curriculum and REQUIRED OF EVERYONE. The burden is on you to prove that if you want to claim they're not employees.

Bottom line, as a school owner, make sure you have a good lawyer and consult them about potential hazards. Carl Brown had a good book that addressed some of the issues a school owner faces. ACMA has a section in their training paterials on legal issues for schools. I know of at least two attorneys who specialize in MA law: Scot Conway and David Kaufman.

[howard]

Barry, thanks very much for that very informative response.

God, everything is a legal minefield these days.

[DragonMind]

Barry, thanks very much for that very informative response.

God, everything is a legal minefield these days.

The really sad thing is we only need lawyers because people refuse to be reasonable and rational with one another.

[Kat]

But hey, people not being able to get along with each other creates soo many jobs!! people arguing is a big industry...wouldn`t want all those policemen, lawyers etc sit on the street , do you?

[dao]

If a school is private and not recieving Federal funds then would it be subject to TItle IX? How would you establish Interstate Commerce?

Deb likes to play devil's advocate....