New Allegations against Kent Hehr

[Oling_Roachinen]

When his first post is to call people referring to it as sexual misconduct as third reich language police, of course people are going to assume he's taking issue with people calling it inappropriate. Jesus. He was the one who wanted to bring up a ridiculous (and completely wrong) argument. You wanted to defend him for presenting his ridiculous argument.

[corporatejay]

Can I just say that at the time I made comment it wasn't being reported that it was to staff. That changes some things.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

How 'unsafe' would an able bodied person be in an elevator with someone who is wheelchair bound?

Whats the worse transgression? Him calling her 'Yummy' or her sabotaging his brakes?

Kind of a coin-toss....

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

When his first post is to call people referring to it as sexual misconduct as third reich language police, of course people are going to assume he's taking issue with people calling it inappropriate. Jesus. He was the one who wanted to bring up a ridiculous (and completely wrong) argument. You wanted to defend him for presenting his ridiculous argument.

No, I want you to respond honestly to what he actually said, preferably without five posts asking you to do so while you moan about it. Conversations on here (and on the internet generally) would get a lot further if people actually did that. I also didn't defend his position at all. Presumably he doesn't need my help to do so. I just objected to your tactics.

[Jacks]

If there is any truth to the warnings women got to stay out of grabbing range then it is entirely reasonable for someone to not feel safe regardless of whether he is wheelchair bound or not.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

No, I want you to respond honestly to what he actually said, preferably without five posts asking you to do so while you moan about it. Conversations on here (and on the internet generally) would get a lot further if people actually did that. I also didn't defend his position at all. Presumably he doesn't need my help to do so. I just objected to your tactics.

Or, you know what, he could have just not started his first post with "calling that sexual misconduct is entering into Nazi territory." If he didn't want his post and position called out.

His literal first response to hearing a woman say that she received unwanted verbally suggestive remarks by Kent Hehr, as part of an ongoing problem, was to laugh. If you really want to defend that post, have at it I guess.

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Haha, what? If those are allegations of "sexual misconduct" I hope there is more than that otherwise we have entered the third reich of language police.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

If you really want to defend that post, have at it I guess.

For ####'s sake, you just can't help yourself, can you?

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

I also didn't defend his position at all. Presumably he doesn't need my help to do so. I just objected to your tactics.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jacks

If there is any truth to the warnings women got to stay out of grabbing range then it is entirely reasonable for someone to not feel safe regardless of whether he is wheelchair bound or not.

If they are alone in an office room and he doesn't lay a finger on her was she in an unsafe situation? Are black cats really bad luck? No they aren't but that doesn't stop people for adopting most of the other colors and leaving the black ones. Where do you draw the line? Now I believe there's smoke here and I have no issues of them being dealt with for his transgressions but this "not feeling safe" thing is a can of worms that is very worrisome.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

If they are alone in an office room and he doesn't lay a finger on her was she in an unsafe situation? Are black cats really bad luck? Where do you draw the line. Now I believe there's smoke here and I have no issues of them being dealt with but this "not feeling safe" thing is a can of worms that is very worrisome.

I'm assuming that women were warned to stay out of grabbing range because he has a history of grabbing. I don't know if it's true that he has done this but if he has then it is entirely reasonable to feel that he might do it again. My comment was mainly aimed at the people inferring that he is somehow harmless because he is in a wheelchair.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yes, I am saying that. I can understand why they'd feel uncomfortable, emotionally distressed, creeped out, angry or upset by it. Justifiably so. But unsafe? No.

I can definitely see being afraid of your boss acting on those comments because he feels he's immune to consequences or that the party in power is protecting him. It's not like we don't have very recent examples of men in power torpedoing the careers of female subordinates or threatening to when their sexual advances have been resisted.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I can definitely see being afraid of your boss acting on those comments because he feels he's immune to consequences or that the party in power is protecting him.

Maybe you're right. But when you say "acting on those comments", what do you mean by that?

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Minnie

I've been harassed and it sucked. But if someone on an elevator told me I was yummy, my own personal response would have been more than a bit on the blue side and I would have given that person a wide berth and the stinkeye ever after just because I would not want to deal with any more drama beyond that. And if it was Hehr, I realize this is going to sound awful and ableist or whatever, but it's frank and true - what exactly is he going to do to me beyond be a blooming bastard verbally? He would not make me feel "unsafe" muttering a few pipe dream phrases.

But that's *me.* I can't expect anyone else to feel or respond in the same manner I would. And, I have no use for Hehr, I don't like him, but if "you're yummy" is the ONLY thing he's said, well, whatever with his job but again, that isn't up to me. If it's far beyond that, then it should be looked into and dealt with.

and if you worked in his office/department and you responded to him like that, you'd likely have been out of a job and perhaps been blackballed from working for the government. not as simple as saying you would have put him in his place and life goes on the same as before.

[Minnie]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

and if you worked in his office/department and you responded to him like that, you'd likely have been out of a job and perhaps been blackballed from working for the government. not as simple as saying you would have put him in his place and life goes on the same as before.

I'm fine with being out of a job for that. I've been out of a job for it before, and for responding to more than what is so far being alleged regarding Hehr.

But, in terms of this particular thread, I'm out. It's gone the usual route, and I'd rather spend my time more wisely than continuing on with this thread. Enjoy, fellas.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Maybe you're right. But when you say "acting on those comments", what do you mean by that?

I mean if the rumours in this thread are to be believed, then groping would be first on my mind. I guess it really depends on if your definition of "unsafe" is restricted to a fear of physical injury. Fear of psychological injury should be included.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by Jacks

I'm assuming that women were warned to stay out of grabbing range because he has a history of grabbing. I don't know if it's true that he has done this but if he has then it is entirely reasonable to feel that he might do it again. My comment was mainly aimed at the people inferring that he is somehow harmless because he is in a wheelchair.

Keeping your distance from a man in a wheel chair shouldn't be that difficult. That said an employee shouldn't have to worry about this in the first place and the failure here is that it was allowed to happen repeatedly.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

and if you worked in his office/department and you responded to him like that, you'd likely have been out of a job and perhaps been blackballed from working for the government. not as simple as saying you would have put him in his place and life goes on the same as before.

Not to mention that Minnie might not be the shy, shrinking type, but some people are, and shouldn't be in any worse a position in their office for that.

Plus, anecdotally, I actually know someone who is the exact opposite of a shrinking violet, apparently had something totally inappropriate said to her at a work function (I didn't press as to what exactly it was). She weighed the pros and cons and ultimately decided it wasn't worth the drama of having to deal with the fallout, going over her story in a boardroom in front of HR and senior management people, and getting someone canned, all while potentially affecting the way people looked at her at work and her future prospects of advancement. I couldn't really tell her she was wrong to make that decision, either. So, he just gets away with it, and presumably can go ahead and behave likewise in the future. It's pretty clear that this stuff does happen all too frequently and that often there are no consequences, even when the person it happens to isn't the sort you'd consider terribly vulnerable.

Originally Posted by rubecube

I mean if the rumours in this thread are to be believed, then groping would be first on my mind. I guess it really depends on if your definition of "unsafe" is restricted to a fear of physical injury. Fear of psychological injury should be included.

It's a tough one, because you're right, it wouldn't be at all unreasonable to feel unsafe if someone you know has a history of sexually assaulting people (which is what groping someone is) turned his attention to you and made sexual comments.

That being said, a general view that psychological injury is something we should include in the "unsafe" column is harder, because someone could - and perhaps reasonably - say that they were psychologically harmed by, for example, lewd jokes. That depends on the constitution of the person hearing the joke. But I don't for a second believe that lewd jokes should be seen as a potential safety risk. There has to be a line drawn somewhere, and though it's not perfect, physical interference is the best I've got at the moment.

[surferguy]

Does he actually have the mobility to touch? I thought he didn't have ability to use his arms. I've met him a few times and can't remember if I've shaken his hand or not?

[Oling_Roachinen]

Yes, he has at least some use of his arms and hands.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That being said, a general view that psychological injury is something we should include in the "unsafe" column is harder, because someone could - and perhaps reasonably - say that they were psychologically harmed by, for example, lewd jokes. That depends on the constitution of the person hearing the joke. But I don't for a second believe that lewd jokes should be seen as a potential safety risk. There has to be a line drawn somewhere, and though it's not perfect, physical interference is the best I've got at the moment.

Except we know the type of damage that harassment and bullying can lead to, so I'm not sure why you wouldn't include it.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Except we know the type of damage that harassment and bullying can lead to, so I'm not sure why you wouldn't include it.

Again, harassment and bullying can - without more - lead to emotional distress of various types. Those are not, however, matters of personal safety, despite being bad. If I make fun of you in front of your peers to the extent you feel serious emotional distress, I might be an a-hole, and certainly I might even deserve to get fired if we work in the same place, but you don't get to call the police unless you have a reasonable fear that I'm going to physically assault you in some way. That's the "more" that takes us over the line into a safety issue.