This precisely.

Think back to your interactions with others (siblings, playmates, etc.) as a kid. Those experiences taught you how to interact with others. Obviously there were mistakes - you learn to not punch others, call names, etc. The punishment was often a simple timeout, note to parents, etc.

People need to "learn" how to interact with "others" in a professional setting. This process of learning involves making mistakes. Unfortunately, in the professional workplace, the "punishment" usually involves HR, lawyers, and a risk to ruin one's career/reputation.

So most people prefer to not "learn", and instead stick to interacting with only those they are already comfortable with - e.g. people of the same gender, color, social class etc. Social media has already made this hell. More laws will only make this worse. Of course, this isn't helped by the fact that there are actual assholes who deliberately abuse others.

Anecdote - I once sent a stern/corrective email to a female colleague/junior. There was nothing gender specific in the message. My/our boss was in cc. She forwarded the mail to HR, and I got a rebuke from the boss (male) and an informal warning to not critique women. Voila.

Its not just about accidentally crossing the line but the possibility of bad intentions. Especially if there is a difference in power. University has the same problem. Never be alone in a room with a female student you have to grade is really important advice for male Professors. Having a third party sit in in one on one meetings is generally a reasonable precaution. Its simply to big of a risk to take. Its only reasonable that situation is similar with people in different positions of the company hierarchy.

Its unfortunate but it is what it is. Telling people to do it despite the risk involved is just bad advice.

The problem is that risk reward is so skewed in other direction.

For anyone to accuse someone of sexual harassment is 100% career killing move.

So when 2 people in the room, the one with least power has the most to loose in bringing accusations.

I dont think that is the case, but it might be a regional or cultural difference.

In America what person is going to gain by bringing accusations.

The best case is pay out, but they definitely lost this job, future opportunities, etc. They are not going to get recommendations letters.

As soon as you accuse someone you start costing company gigaton of money.

In America we promote/keep people who make money not cost money.

This is a rational analysis of the game theory with both parties being rational actors, that is not always the case.

Imagine a situation where the employee hates the manager and just wants to screw them over for a past issue, being passed over for a promotion or whatever, and the employee is going through some life patches. The employee has a one on one with their employer privately to solve an issue and then following this meeting, turns around and sued the company and the manager with sexual harassment.

If you do not think there are vindictive employees, then your statement works, however, they exist. So, if you are innocent and accused, the risk FAR outweighs the mentor ship rewards; losing your job, being blackballed, loss of trust from your significant other, etc. vs. providing guidance.

> The best case is pay out, but they definitely lost this job, future opportunities, etc. They are not going to get recommendations letters.

You think this didn't change after MeToo? This kind of attitude can easily end in a legal and PR nightmare.

"No longer"? #MeToo was about highlighting how many dysfunctional behaviours occurred with the current set of norms, so clearly the old norms didn't work great either.

I suspect that view depends on your gender.

I didn't mean that as a facetious comment. As (hopefully) a non-creepy male I was blissfully unaware of the prevalence. I didn't do it, see it, hear it - and therefore it didn't happen. Therefore nothing to worry about.

Now I know it happens far more frequently that I'd thought, I worry about it. Plus, unlike a lot of other workplace issues, it's.. well currently awkward (for want of a better word) to handle.

If you didn't believe to be somebody involved before, it's a little hard to work out how you should adjust your behaviour.

e.g. "Would you care to join me for dinner after the meetings today, I assure you it is merely to discuss the outcome of the workshops and the day ahead. I can assure you that it is in no way an attempt for me to force you to spend some time with me in the presence of alcohol. I would like to stress I would never try to use my power to seduce you. I tried to ask HR how to ask you out, but they got worried as well. When I said "asked out" just then I didn't mean in a "date" sense, but in a..."

orders room service

OK - more facetious than I thought. Sorry.

Maybe more realistic scenario is just when working away asking "Can you come to my room so we can spend 30 mins updating the deck for tomorrow?"

Think I'd have been fine asking that previously - and now maybe less so. We can try to lurk in a corner of the lobby, which is annoying loud and doesn't have a desk.

But that change involves the thought of "maybe I'm considered to be a creepy male" - and that's not a nice thought to have (although probably good for me).

Just change the question to? Are you OK with us continuing in my room because blah blah, otherwise we can just do it in the lobby.

Basically, you give them power to decide where they feel comfortable most. Especially first time around.

“Can you come to my room in 30m to do blah” is an order basically, so as a result you already create hostile situation irrelevant of gender.

That's still no good (opinion, not statement of fact).

Just suggest the lobby, or find a coffee shop. It may be annoying, but now you're not putting any burden on her at all. If she suggests an alternative, you can use your judgement, but why even put that on her in the first place?

I don't think Harvey Weinstein's actions were anywhere close to accepted by "the old norms". He didn't get away with it for so long because "that's who society works, that's what everybody did", but because he was extremely powerful. Power always allows you to sidestep rules and norms because your victims will be afraid of you and others that could interfere will want favors from you, so they look away.

Pre sexual revolution there were strict codes of conduct. Often broken but they were thrown out leaving a void.

That's a load of BS. Have you ever been accused of "crossing the line" with a male colleague? Have you even been concerned that you might? If not, then I think I found your problem. If someone can't come in to work and do something as simple a act like a professional around their co-workers for a few hours then it makes me wonder what else they can't do professionally.

A male colleague will often lean on others here at work. Other males. It's a little creepy but no one really cares. It just doesn't have the same impact.

And so we’re still denying women opportunity for the sake of the comfort of men.

Do you think this is comfort? Do you really think being afraid of accusations is a comforting situation in any way?

It wouldn't hurt you to see the world through other viewpoints from time to time.

Yes. There's a whole body of language out there used to deride male behaviors in the workplace:

- mansplaining: not the same as mentoring, but try drawing that Venn diagram someday.

- patriarchal: Shame on men for assuming women _need_ help from them with their careers. That's a sexist assumption. Try drawing the Venn diagram for mentoring and fatherly behavior.

The whole bandwagon of "microaggressions" and "unconscious bias" where people are attempting to solve for thought crime gets us here, where it is safer to disengage.

I don't think you're disagreeing with the GP here.

I'm stating agreement with the post I replied to, yes.

/s "Just be a decent human being!".

Can you define accidentally?

Do a lot of people give their boss middle finger accidentally?

Like yo, went to work, talked to CEO and give him finger, must be weather.

No but people do get too familiar with the boss and make comments or conduct them selves in ways that are not appropriate with a boss.

People do make jokes that offend CEO's or customers all the time. Social interaction is not as easy to navigate for everyone.

I'm not talking about blatant abuses of power here I'm talking about subtle interactions that make people uncomfortable.