Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE MAJORITY OF female third-level students have reported experiencing sexual hostility or crude gender harassment at some point since starting college, a new report has found.
In a survey of 632 students, conducted by the NUI Galway SMART Consent research team, 54% of first-year women students reported experiencing sexual hostility or crude gender harassment since starting college.
This rose to 64% among second-year women students and 70% among third-year students.
The comparable figures for men are 25%, 37% and 40%.
The report – Are Consent Workshops Sustainable and Feasible in Third Level Institutions? – includes surveys with over 3,500 students conducted at NUI Galway consent workshops held at four colleges nationwide.
Along with sexual harassment during college years, the report examined perceptions of sex education at school and perceptions of alcohol and capacity to give consent.
Alcohol and consent
In one survey, 733 students read one of two versions of a story about consent where both characters were drinking alcohol.
Only one in five students considered the female character too drunk to give consent in the story where she consumed 14 standard drinks, while just 33% considered the character too drunk in the version where she consumed 28 standard drinks.
14% of the students considered the male character too drunk to give consent after 14 standard drinks, and 30% considered him too drunk after 28 standard drinks.
Speaking at the launch of the report today, Minister of State for higher education Mary Mitchell O’Connor said she is considering making classes on sexual consent compulsory in all Irish colleges.
She said she now believes it is time time to formulate a “standard of institutional responsibility to address sexual harassment and assault”.
Third-level institutions will have to meet a certain criteria of standards in terms of how they are dealing with the issue, with the minister adding that colleges will be drawn together to establish a “a best fit for such a standard”.
Sex education
In a survey of 2,150 students, 71% of women and 63% of men said they were dissatisfied with the sexual health education they received at school.
14% of women and 17% of men were neutral on this question, while 15% of women and 20% of men were satisfied with their sexual health education at school.
More lesbian, gay and bisexual students felt that their sexual health education at school did not cover the topics they are most interested in (75%), compared with heterosexual students (66%).
“The survey findings show that the social environment in which consent takes place among college students is often unsupportive – most women experience harassment, a large majority of all students are dissatisfied with their sexual health education at school and social norms for drinking minimise the true impact of alcohol on the capacity to give consent,” Dr Pádraig MacNeela of NUI Galway said.
Minister for State for Higher Education Mary Mitchell O’Connor will today launch the report.
Ahead of the launch, she said: “All institutions have a duty of care to their students and I am delighted to see many of them integrate and support these empowerment and preventative initiatives, such as mandatory consent workshops.
As Minister, it falls to me to ensure that providing excellence in education depends also on providing a safe learning environment, free from sexual harassment, assault and the fear or threat of it.
“Therefore, I welcome Dr Pádraig MacNeela’s report. It is a timely piece of research given the National Council on Curriculum and Assessment is carrying out a major review of the relationships and sexuality curriculum.”
The minister said it is simply not acceptable that the majority of students surveyed feel let down by the level of sex education they received in school. “We have a lot of work to do, ” said Mitchell O’Connor.
With additional reporting by Christina Finn
The full report can be read here.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
So the surveys are conducted solely on people who voluntarily attend sexual consent workshops, but the findings are extrapolated to all students? You can’t do that, the sample cannot be presumed to be representative. Sociologists need to learn some stats, or anything other than sociology really.
@Liam Doyle: I agree that everyone needs to be better at stats, but why is your reaction to this a hostile one? Have you read the study or are you just responding to the Journal’s article in it? Do you know what the make up of the sample was? Do you know how they controlled for it in reporting their findings?
@Liam Doyle: and no matter how representative the sample was, do you not think 70% is a statistically significant finding, even if it can’t be extrapolated to all students? Somewhere we are failing our youths in their sexual education. Let’s group together to proactively address this, not shoot the messenger even if the messenger is a bit shit.
@Conor Paddington: There seems to be a narrative, not confined to the journal, that any opinion or finding pertaining to sexual harassment, gender discrimination etc. must be challenged and minimised.
This is typically supported by whatabouttery (‘where’s the stats on gender harassment to men’, ‘why is there no women on the bin trucks’, etc etc) and ‘sure you can’t even compliment a colleague now’.
The struggles of white male privilege are forever lamenting their supposed lack of a voice.
@Conor Paddington: “…includes surveys with over 3,500 students conducted at NUI Galway consent workshops held at four colleges nationwide.” Their sampling is described. Why would I read a report with flawed methodology? If I want to read fiction I enjoy Stephen King and Tom Clancy. And I’m hostile because this happens too often these days – people with no business in academia (notice the lack of mention in which journal this “report” is being published) conduct unscientific “studies” with predetermined results, these “studies” are then used to influence public policy. These people are political activists, not academics.
@Conor Paddington: how can it be statistically significant if it’s not representative? Statistically significant within the group surveyed do you mean? Sure, but who cares, the next group could easily display completely different results.
@Liam Doyle: even if that’s true, they’re not political activists for a bad cause, are they? And this study is informative if not persuasive. It’s also informative of a problem we already know exists. Look at the comments on here, they’re three categories: 1. “I’d like to know how this study was put together”; 2. “Maybe these girls should lay off the drink”, and 3. “Gender hostiliy is nonsense”. Why does it not give any of these lads pause to think when our women are crying out that enough is enough?
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: very well said, Rónán. “And sure why are they drinking so much anyway”… I don’t understand why this isn’t a cause for compassion and concern amongst men, rather than hostility.
@Conor Paddington: what? How is it informative if it’s just made up for all intents and purposes? But you’re showing your true colours now “they’re not political activists for a bad cause, are they?” Who decides good and bad politics, Conor? You ok with some far right loons usurping academic office for political ends, publishing studies with flawed methodology confirming the inferiority of non-white races, all under the banner of academia? But it’s okay to do all those things when it’ “good politics”, right? And of course, your political views will always be in vogue, so precedents of undermining our academic structures for political aims should be grand in future.
@Liam Doyle: the cause is to reduce instances of sexual harassment and non-consensual sexual encpunters… why do you have such a problem with that?
@Conor Paddington: i have a problem with academics lying. I have a problem with political activists masquerading as academics, and then lying some more. I have a problem with these things no matter the current justification. You’re fine with all those things though, yeah? End justifies the means and people with “bad politics” will never be able to figure out how to do these things anyway so to hell with dangerous precedent, yeah?
@Liam Doyle: well no. Having had a look it’s a very comprehensive, joint up report published by the school of psychology (not sociology as you initially falsely stated) who very much understand stats and is being published by the Minister of State for Higher Education. It was conducted at 4 colleges Nationally and involves thousands of students, the sample is not only quite good, it is also large enough to be significant. It’s findings are deeply troubling and require action, and I honestly don’t know why anyone other than a Men’s Rights activist would be challenged by them.
@Conor Paddington: what? a sample being large doesn’t render it significant! Your understanding of stats is so strong i’m guessing you’re a sociologist yourself.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Rónán, if you cant make a point without somehow bringing race and sex into it then you should probably be rethinking what you’re going to say. It could be argued that any opinion not in line with the ‘right on’ brigade narrative in issues pertaining to sexual harassment, gender discrimination is just down to ‘straight white males’ lashing out. I know it seems fashionable to throw this term around now but in years to come you will likely be quite embarrassed.
@Neill Mcilwaine:
How will I be quite embarrassed? By what?
All articles here on issues of gender discrimination, sexual harassment and racism bring about the same response – denial of the problem, deflection to other more severe examples, or some claims that no one is standing up for men against female violence/harssment/discrimination, or for the west against islamic culture, or whatever is the agenda.
I’m not advocating anything but tolerance and respect, I am not part of a brigade, and I’ll make no apology for tackling ignorance on human rights issues.
@Conor Paddington: It depends what the 70% is representative of. We could have a study that says 70% of young males suffer feelings of rejection and low self esteem brought about by reading how terrible they are in the latest survey.
@David Knight: why would that be your response to this? Why isn’t your response “shit, am I implicated in this? I’d better learn and improve”?
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: You should be embarrassed to be throwing around racist terms like ‘white male privilege’. Blithe dismissal of an entire group of people like that is the very opposite of tolerance and respect and this should be obvious imo.
Articles here on this topic are often met with the same response as they are blatantly pushing the divisive ‘men bad – women good’ feminist narrative.
This survey seems to have been very clearly targeted at a certain group with the intention of generating a particular outcome -which is then extrapolated out countrywide. If the Alt-Right ran a workshop and did a survey to confirm their own biases it rightly wouldn’t be trumpeted as fact by the media and referenced by a minister for higher education. Why should this one be any different?
@Neill Mcilwaine: Rónán and I are white men and are totally comfortable with the term white male privilege and its implications. You can join us on the unproblematic side of it if you want, it doesn’t hurt to be compassionate and understanding and to listen to people who say they’re hurting x
@Liam Doyle: Part of the survey says just over 2,000 students responded to an email sent out to all students in NUI Galway, which has a student population of over 18,000.
This would indicate that almost 90% of the student population had an opportunity to take part in this survey, but declined the offer for whatever reasons. As Liam said this survey reflects only the views of those who responded, it can’t be assumed to reflect those who didn’t wish to respond.
If you asked the views of ten people in a room and only one wished to answer, it would be incorrect to assume that person represented the other nine because they had an opportunity to respond. That appears to be what’s happening here but with larger numbers.
@Brian Boru: then we can’t report anything. All studies are based on a sample. You’ve just ruined applies academia. Most of medicine is over now, too. For better or for worse, you’ll go down in history for this.
@Conor Paddington: “Why isn’t your response “shit, am I implicated in this?“
That’s the propaganda working. You shouldn’t respond by feeling implicated in anything. You are an individual, not an easily classified member of a category. If you have nothing to answer for then you have no guilt to carry. The same goes for white guilt, etc.
You can’t use bad data no matter what the goal. The U.S has already seen rape rates on par with the Congo being reported on campuses – it was bad data. That kind of alarmism is damaging to the social fabric and the psyche of those affected by it. There’s a lot of bad actors who ingratiate themselves into these groups, too, likely to relieve some guilt they’re carrying. It’s sadder that they go on to prey on women who already feel victimized. Beware the male feminist. I got sent a GQ article in the comments here once; full of virtue signaling yet the person who posted it didn’t realise the author had already been fired for sexual harassment…
@Conor Paddington: Compassion and understanding are fine in and of themselves but not when used as tools to bully and dismiss those who disagree with you – ie. our opinion is the compassionate one and by disagreeing with us you are a bad person. What should you do when the person who says they are hurting is actually lying and has an agenda? Taking the ‘compassionate’ side by default without being even a little but critical isnt the best approach imo
If you are happy to be lumped in as just another ‘white man’ with ‘privilege’ thats your business i suppose but trying to claim the moral high ground while also speaking the language of racial identity is a strange mix.
@Conor Paddington: A sample should be representative.
Eg. Surveying party preference at a Sinn Fein Ard Fheis would show extraordinary levels of support for SF. Could that then be extrapolated countrywide?
@Liam Doyle: Maybe we should do a quick poll on how many people feel they need an anger management course.
@Conor Paddington: Put simply medical surveys give us random sampling of a particular data set, let’s say patients between the age of 50 to 90 in relatively good health who may take a particular medication. Nothing else. They’re told very little in order not to influence or prejudice their opinion.
This survey however invited responses from those with a spefic interest to an email it had sent out “on their perceptions of the sexual health education they received while at school”. It’s fair to say this wasn’t random and was quite specific, so when the 11% of people responded they knew, or had a fair idea, what to expect and what they were responding to.
This ‘group’ of people therefore couldn’t be said to be a random sampling of a particular data set, rather they were a small group with a very specific interest. To say they’re representative of everyone else, the other 89% would also be equally be wrong. Whereas a random, controlled medical survey, for example, could be said to be representative.
@Conor Paddington: Your assumption that, because I am a man, I must be implicated in this, is exactly what I have a problem with. Not all men are implicated in “this”. Some try to treat people with dignity and respect, regardless of their sex, colour, religion, country of origin, sexual persuasion. All men are not Harvey Weinstein, but if young men keep getting judged as if they were, like you are clearly doing, then that is not going to help them grow into the type of men we would all like to be.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: “Male white privilege” Actual facepalm.
@David Knight: you’re not saying anything I disagree with. But, there is a difference between being Weinstein, and just generally engaging in behaviour that makes women feel small and threatened. We can all do better and should always be trying to figure out how.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: in all fairness mate, “findings” such as this deserve to be challenged in the context they were “found” independent of everything else
Cake survey here – come and try a free cake!
Survey Finding: 94% of people like cakes
And it’s equally quite lazy and simplistic to dump all valid commentary / criticism into the bucket of “white male privilege”
@UK Hurling Bloke: I actually didn’t put all commentary in that bucket, I specifically spoke about those who engage in whatabouttery/deflection such as “what about harassment of men?”, “they should try living in Saudi Arabia”, etc instead of addressing the points.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: ok so if you spoke specifically about people engaging in whataboutery then why bring race into it?
Look, you sound like you’re not a bad bloke but when those kind of terms are used it detracts from what you are trying to say.
I’d be interested to know the methodology of this report, telling third level students stories where the characters consume 14 and 28 drinks and asking them if the characters can give consent sounds… frankly childish.
In the real world I couldn’t stand after 14 drinks and probably couldn’t give you my name, even if I could consume 28, which I doubt, all bets are off.
@Brian Boru: 14 standard drinks = 7 pints, not 14.
Can you stand after 7 pints?
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: To be fair, as a lifelong teetotaler, probably not. A pack of winegums and a whif or a barmans aftershave and I’m anyone’s.
@Greenthor16: Not denying the findings of the survey, just checking that the term ‘standard drink’ is understood.
The report states they suffered “sexual hostility and gender harassment” is this is new terminology being introduced?
@Franny Mac: It looks to me like an attempt to separate different severity of sexual harassment, which is probably a good thing given the propensity of people to deny its outright.
Gender harassment, harassment on the basis of gender, seems a pretty good term to me. My younger self was certainly guilty of lower-end stuff in this bracket, and I’d have passed it off as banter in my own head. Easy to be aware now, but certainly I wish I’d given it more thought back then. I think my behaviour back then could easily have been classified as harassment by some, and certainly would now by more self-aware students.
I was in the workplace before I properly understood some of these concepts, we had an all day workshop on respect in the workplace, and even then it took a while for all of the understanding to properly sink in. It’s definitely a good thing that students are being made more self-aware, and we should certainly try to embed these workshops with secondary school children.
@Franny Mac: what is “gender harassment”?? Seriously, what does that mean. My guess is absolutely nothing.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: I would love to see the elements which represent actual sexual abuse, which I mean somebody forcing themself onto another person in a sexual manner, which would include touching, groping and escalating up to forced penetration and rape being stamped out. I dont think anybody could possibly disagree with these things and that eliminating them would be good. However, sexual harassment is an altogether more ill defined thing. Some people consider wolf whistling and objectification as being sexual harassment. And I have seen enough girls do the same things as men do, especially when in a group. Women can and do objectify men also. I’ve seen women pinch men on the butt…and had women pinch my ass too…is that not sexual abuse?? Or have you never been out with a bunch of friends some of whom were girls. Its just seen as innocent or banter…especially when women do it. But why not when men do? I hear the excuse that, well a man could overpower a woman and actually carry it further and thus a woman could feel threatened, where a woman could not carry a wolf whistle or remark any further and so the man would not feel threatened. And fair enough…that may be the case, but intent is still the deciding factor here. And the intent in most if probably not all of these cases is to be provocative and be noticed in a crude kind of way. I think the point that many on here are trying to make is that if these statistics are to be taken at face value then we are in danger of painting all men as sexually aggressive and potentially abusive and all women as sexually submissive and the sole targets of any form of sexual abuse or harassment…and that is plainly not the case. I do think there should be better sexual education and etiquette established but there should not only be rules for men and women are fine as they are. If we want to start getting prescriptive and start saying men should and shouldnt do things like wolf whistle or pass comment or make sexual gestures and definintely not grope…then maybe should we not also get prescriptive with women and enforce dress codes that eliminate the likelihood of men looking at women on campus?? Boilersuits for women perhaps??? You see you can quickly go too far and to a point where you actually start infringing on freedom of expression…so being prescriptive in any sense is the wrong attitude to take and making it all the problem, fault and responsibility of one gender is also problematic. Both men and women play an active part in sexual provocation…we seem to be allowed to call men out on wolf whistling…but not women for wearing revealing outfits, make up and high heels??? Why is one seen as sexually objectifying women and provocative and the other not??? When part of the root cause of the effect of the wolf whistle is the attire and presentation of the woman. Its not rocket science you know. But society seems to want to bash men solely for being men, and promote women to be or do whatever they want. I dont think you can have an equal society where you dont tackle the root cause of a problem…just the effect it creates. Thats nonsensical and clearly wont work and that is the criteria which many people disagree with as far as I can see. The old adage of “sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander” or what part men and women play in all of this should be identified objectively and rules drawn up which apply to both to carry out…and then maybe the threat of sexual abuse could be actually dealt with.
@Kevin Tyrrell: You’re right. The line which constitutes harassment does not have an adequate general definition. The definition is applied according to the *other* person, and whether or not *they* are uncomfortable.
In that sense, what’s sauce for the goose is *not* sauce for the gander, and that’s what you’re failing to comprehend. People are different, and they take this behaviour differently, and the plenty of case law demonstrates this. I happen to pretty thick skinned, and would take boisterous behaviour from a woman (or indeed another man) to be banter. However, that does not mean another man wouldn’t consider the behaviour to be bullying. And he would have the right to object and go through the channels in the workplace.
So your objective definition is here: Sexual harrassment is persistent approaches, advances, comments or behaviour based on gender, or with sexual overtones, which is unwelcome by the person receiving it. The responsibility is on *you* to receive the message *early* about how welcome your behaviour is, and not *persist*. It is not for you to determine that your behaviour is not sexually threatening, that is a feeling of discomfort experienced by the recipient.
I don’t bash men, I think men are great. All of my best friends are men.
As for your comments on high-heels and make-up being an example of women taking an active part in sexual provocation – that’s just risible, and slut-shaming – victim blaming’s ugly cousin.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Well…given your definition then the inappropriate action is only when it is “persistent”. That is the overarching descriptor of the actions…but most feminists and some women term any unwanted sexual advance such as a single wolf whistle as being sexual harassment. If a woman walks down the street and a man wolf whistles at her once is she being sexually harassed? By your definition she is not as it is not persistent action by that man. But many feminists would term this to be sexual harassment. And your argument also hinges on the feelings of the person to which the action is aimed…and thats okay. I get that. But how can I know whether the person is thick or thin skinned? If it is persistent and they show signs of distress…then I guess that is enough of a display to warrant backing off…but then again, many feminists term the initial interaction as sexual harassment and enough to warrant the authorities being brought in. That is the target of my comment. Your definition may well be well meaning and something most could work within, but most feminists dont share that definition and they are the ones writing these papers, conducting these polls and seeking to inform and create the policies which will deal with sexual harassment and abuse. We seem to be discussing 2 different definitions and you are targeting my comment with your definition…which is not exactly an accurate assessment of my statement and that is the point entirely…as sexual harassment is a moving target as far as definition goes. If you take the extreme scenario which most feminists would agree is the actual definition (any unwanted sexual advances at all and not limited to persistent)…which is what I was discussing…and want to stamp it out, is it not incumbent upon both sexes to do something about it? Or is it only the responsibility of men??? And would you deride the women who make such gestures also?? The state of your argument is naturally aimed at men as most of the time men are the ones expected to approach a woman…and yes it should be in a polite manner…Im not saying it shouldnt…but not all men will behave politely…and not all women will either. But you can not deny that there is a cause and effect sequence here. The cause is the sight of probably a scantily clad woman having the effect on a more neanderthal type of man. Should we not take both aside and show them both that they contribute to the scenario? And Im not slut shaming or anything else. I havent called any woman a slut or insinuated that I would see any woman as such…but some men do. Thats the point I am trying to make. And yes…I love men and women and I try not to judge any single individual but it is hard to escape in an objective sense…and I am not talking subjectively here at all…that the most attention is towards women who are trying to gain that attention through their appearance. It is plain as day to see…why do girls dress that way if not to attract sexual attention??? And I know that is a very taboo subject to touch on…and I can see that you are probably not going to engage that point at all beyond calling me a slut-shamer but it is to me a valid part of the argument. There is cause and effect in many instances and nobody is entirely operating in a vacuum. I dont wish to tell women what they should and shouldnt wear…but then should we tell men how they should and shouldnt react to women if it is not actually threatening? And trust me…women can be obsessive and persistent too…ever heard of the term “bunny boiler”??? Women can do just as much of that as men.
@Franny Mac: This is this new wave leftist wankology straight from Canada / USA. ‘Gender Studies’ and the like. Trying to spread their cancer over here with outlandish bogus statistics in an attempted to force everyone else to adopt their bogus ‘non binary’ ‘toxic masculinity’ nonsense. Just ignore them
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Would I take it that the concerned social justice types would like is to hearken back to a day when men were required to act more respectfully and reservedly towards women with a certain sense of due deference? It seems like you think it would be a good thing. A reinvigorated age of chivalry. However that age had a certain prescriptive sense of modesty and reserve in women also, particularly in their dress and appearance. You would like to see men become more reserved, respectful, dignified, and comport themselves in a restrained way. But why not see the other side of that coin also and say that women should similarly act and be and appear more reserved and modest? it seems like one side of this coin is eminently desirable and should be taught to and enforced among young men…but the other side would be too dictatorial and against womens freedom of expression. Do you not see the dichotomy here? You want mainly men to change their attitudes and for society to better educate them to control their sexual behaviour and become more reserved, respectful, modest and polite…yet you deem no such attitude change or necessity for modesty and respect is needed in women. Is there not a conflicting sense of disproportionate blame and heaping of the problem on the male sex it this???
@Christopher Byrne: Unfortunately this is a very insidious orthodoxy which is being preached to the more compassionate strains of society and preys upon their sense of needing to protect the vulnerable…but it does so by exaggerating the victimhood of one group…diminishing their responsibility to nothing and heaping all the blame on another group and thus all the responsibility to change or else upon them. It is basically a lens that determines if you belong to one group you are a victim and if you belong to the other you are at best an oppressor and worst an abuser…and there is no in between. No nuance. No scenario where one could be a victim if they dont belong to the prescriptive group which intersectionality deems is the victim group…always!!! Its all to force an agenda that has little to no actual real world relevance or basis in reality. Its popular…because its easy. You can basically learn all you need to know in an afternoon and get your gender studies degree which will of course leave you unemployed unless you get involved with a special interest group and onto a government committee or something. And it beggars belief that state institutions actually listen to this lunacy. Any moderately intelligent person knows its just a hateful and entirely irrational attempt to co-opt the more compassionate in society into a legion of rhetoric spouting zombies…in order to take down the “patriarchy”…whatever that means…but we all know it has everything to do with white, straight men!!! Its already ruining the Universities in the USA and Canada and has taken over politics in Canada…but hopefully it will be a passing fad and be disregarded as just what it is…bare naked misandry.
@Kevin Tyrrell:
I’m not singling out men. Women should respect men too. Catcalling and wolf-whistling at strangers is not respectful behaviour. It can easily be deemed as harassment.
I also don’t know why you think men’s behaviour and what women wear are two sides of the same coin. A woman dressing in a revealing outfit is not her taking two steps towards anyone before the merry dance begins. Sure, she might be trying to attract a man, but she might also just want to feel good about how she looks going out. A girl dressing for attention does not imply she is dressing for ‘sexual attention’.
Anyway, genuine question, since you equate women’s attire with men’s behaviour, and believe that some responsibility is on the woman’s dress and actions, what are the currency exchange rates?
Short dress = 3 Wolf Whistles?
Low cut top = 2 Wolf Whistles and a way-hay accompanied by a cupping gesture?
Dancing provocatively with her friend = 2 arse bumps an a slither from behind her?
Since you want the discussion to include implied equivalence between clothing/behaviour and a subsequent advance, you might enlighten us to your adjusted threshold for harassment based on the recipient’s atttire and public behaviour? The KT scale, if you will
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Im not saying that we should have a threshold for what a woman should wear and to what degree it would be revealing or not. I am merely saying that it is somewhat proportional to the amount of sexual attention she gets. Im not saying in what proportion the 2 are related since that will vary between the men and their reactions to her. But you must be living in some very idealistic world if you think that womens attire contributes in NO way to the amount of attention she receives. Of course it does. Its what it is designed to do…it is the raison d-etre for provocative clothing. And since we have gotten onto the topic of the woman wants to look good…yes of course she does…and why??? To attract male attention. She isnt wearing those crippling 6 inch heels because they are comfy!!! She isnt squeezing into her skinny jeans or short dress because its comfy!!! It is to attract attention and she knows it will. Why do women put an over-emphasis on their looks??? Why do women constantly compare themselves to other women in terms of looks??? Because that is their sexual currency. That is their self determined value in terms of attracting a mate. You are just being completely disingenuous if you say it isnt!!! What I am saying is that if you want ALL men to behave in a more dignified, courteous, gentlemanly, respectful and dignified manner towards women…and make it all their problem, why is it not dancing to the same tune to have all women dress more conservatively and act more dignified? Or would it just ruin some aspect of life for you not to see those aspects of women…or if you are a woman to not be able to dress that way??? Im not for enforcing dress codes…but I dont want this all to be seen as a mans problem and nothing to do with women either. What I am pointing out is that if you want men to change their attitudes towards women in the sexual marketplace…why should you not expect women to change also??? Or is it only a mans problem and men that should change???
@Kevin Tyrrell: As I said. Just ignore them. Not worth the energy….A bunch of nutters
@Franny Mac: Lost in the rush to protect the fairer sex are all those M+F who’ve been subject to harassment and hostility from the female empowered, which is irrational simply because they don’t normally reason.
@Veronica: I wonder does man hating toxic feminism qualify as gender harassment?
Would you like a dance ?
@Chewey Bacca: exactly, what is considered sexual harassment
@Austin Rock: Or woman
@GClare:
‘Would you like a dance?’ is not sexual harassment at a disco. It might be at the office when there’s no music playing.
Staring angrily at the girl afterwards when she agrees to dance with someone else is harassment.
Not taking no for an answer and asking her repeatedly is harassment.
Asking her every Friday night when you see her is harassment.
Demanding to know why she danced with Billy Joe and not you is harassment.
In other words, advances/comments/propositions which are clearly not welcome constitute harassment.
It’s a minefield if you willfully ignore the girl’s body language and response, but if you are self aware and respect the other person’s right to say ‘no thanks’ in a friendly way, you won’t stray on the wrong side of the line.
Clear?
As for the workplace, that’s trickier, but here’s some simple rules:
- You wouldn’t compliment a male colleague on how spiffing he looked today, so don’t compliment a female colleague on her appearance. It might be welcome, but it probably won’t be, and repeatedly commenting on a female colleagues appearance is definitely harassment, and at best will give you a reputation as a creep
- If you want to ask a colleague out for a drink, be prepared to take a polite excuse as a no. Everyone has to get along at work and your colleague is being put on the spot – she will most likely be polite, but that doesn’t mean you’re welcome to try again.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: I have often been complimented by women on how well I look. Unfortunately I was not aware that I was being sexually harassed.
@Frank McGlynn: You weren’t, unless it was unwelcome and made you feel bad. If you enjoy compliments then you are free to continue to enjoy them, safe in the knowledge that it’s not harassment.
People are individuals, and have the right to feel respected. As an individual, you are free to enjoy any pinch, wolf-whistle, fumble, compliment, kiss on the face or whatever attention you personally welcome. Just don’t assume you can apply *your* standards to any body of your choosing.
The law in this area mostly applies to the workplace, where you interact socially and professionally with people by necessity, and not by choice, but it the principles can be applied to respect in colleges and other gathering places you find yourself in.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: “You weren’t, unless it was unwelcome”……and how do you know its unwelcome?, do you ask before hand to see if you can actually say it without causing offence?
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: You had me at hello
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: “In other words, advances/comments/propositions which are clearly not welcome constitute harassment.”
How can someone know an advance is unwelcome until the advance is made?? And at that stage the advancer will either be welcomed or more probably labelled a sexual harraser. What completely bonkers logic. Did anyone even think this rubbish through before spouting it???
How can a student afford that much drink?
@Martello Mulligan: parents on benefits so they get money for everything…not like working parents
@John Horan: What parents on the social can afford to send their kids to college?
@Mark McDermott: Those on the social with an income below 39,875 (excluding HAP and other payments) and less than 4 kids who will get full maintenance and full fee grant. Larger families even bigger income allowed. I know of one working man who tactically quit work and went back to college when his kids were at secondary. He got his and all his kids third level education paid for. Kids got maintenance grants as well. At the same time his wife was on the social. Overall he was financially better off than working and paying his kids education. Additionally at the end he came out with a masters and got a higher salary. I don’t blame him…super smart move. Why does our system make it better to reduce your income, and place the burden on taxpayers?
what about men who experience sexual hostility and gender harassment??
Will you do a separate article on it?
@Rob Doyle: you didn’t read the above article, did you my dude.
@Veronica: Who reads the rubbish articles?? just the headings..
Surprising why didn’t they have the heading 25% of men are etc
men are victims too
@Rob Doyle: so you don’t read the rubbish articles but you’ll take the time and effort to come to the rubbish comments to add some rubbish of your own? Makes sense.
@neilo: Well said Neilo.
@Rob Doyle: The above article did state that 40% of year3 male students were subjected to the same type of abuse from females but this is Thejournal.ie and any kind of reporting that shows up males suffering at the hands of females is not and will not be tolerated. They shall as they always have done concentrate solely on the evil that is male…
This study is extremely flawed. Firstly it presents no limitations whatsoever. No figures on the efficacy of the method presented. It touts itself as the best way to modify sexual attitudes without presenting any supporting data. No data on its effect of modifying intrapersonal ineffectiveness when under the influence, nor increased knowledge of social cues, or modified beliefs systems etc NOTHING! Not one data table. No mention of behavioural change figures. No attitudinal modification psychometric. Not even one psychometric test? NOTHING?
@Seán Ó Conbhuidhe: It’s a survey though, not a scientific paper put forward for peer review. It’s not meant to stand up as statistics, it’s meant to invoke discussion.
As a reflection of attitudes to sexual harassment, it’s a good yard stick, and if nothing else, proves that the methodology you’ve proposed is worth actually doing.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Hi Ronan are you suggesting surveys don’t need to apply sound metrics in pursuit of empirical data which may provide the basis for scientific studies? Surveys are an integral part of scientific studies. To say they are somehow exempt from reproach is ridiculous.
You’ve actually bamboozled yourself in that you mentioned it is a ”good yard stick” for future studies and my argument is there’s no point in using a yard stick which has no defined measurements. Hence the need for data
@Seán Ó Conbhuidhe: I’m not bamboozled, it was a poll of attendees, and the article states what it was. The headline is misleading, as its not a general population poll, but that’s clickbait for you.
Your desire to thrash the result of a simple survey is probably more indicative of your desire to deny its result, than you taking a purist objection to methodology.
Do you object to every journal poll in this way? Do you go around twitter fighting twitter polls and espousing the necessity for sound metrics in the pursuit of empirical data?
Get a grip. It’s not a scientific measure, it’s a good deal better than anecdotal data, a good deal worse than empirical data, but the sheer numbers attending these workshops and subsequently voting is enough to demonstrate that the problem is real, and that a number of people believe there is a problem.
@Rónán O’Suilleabháin: Hi Ronan. A simple survey. Yes thank you for agreeing. As I said it doesn’t make sense to present something so simple without proper data. It took a while but we got you there eventually. Also I see it didn’t take you long to begin suggesting my reasons for commenting were based on misogyny and not the pursuit of empirical scientific data on a very important subject. But then again slander is the last refuge of the fool. So I guess you’re home.
@Seán Ó Conbhuidhe: What is proper data?
So the moral of the story is lay off the drink.
@Towger: drink doesn’t always have to be involved. When I was in college, a guy I knew asked me out. I turned him down. He persisted to the point that I didn’t feel comfortable walking campus alone in broad daylight. I would literally change plans last second if I spotted him coming towards me. He just couldn’t take no for an answer. It took going on Erasmus for the stalking to stop.
@Mirabelle Stonegate: I’d say you are like many others – who suffer in silence.
@Mirabelle Stonegate: Yes, I remember a patient in the hospital I worked in kept asking me out. In the end I asked the nurse in charge to have a word with him as he just wouldn’t take no for an answer.
@Austin Rock: my friends knew it was happening and stuck with me. Thankfully, it’s the worst experience I’ve had overall, as I didn’t know what to do.
What exactly is “Sexual hostility”?
@Gerard Casserly: The new anything goes freedom sounds great until it becomes reality.
@Gerard Casserly: Demeaning jokes or accusations. Especially common towards women in courses that may be considered traditionally male.
@Gerard Casserly: This.
https://youtu.be/c42ecevvl54
@LET’S DIG UP THE ROAD!!!: I agree.
“sexual hostility or crude gender harassment”
Not open to misinterpretation at all that.
This is not one bit surprising….
@Jenny Kelleher: Really?
@Edward Smith: life as a woman is a hugely different experience to that of a man.
@Veronica: you seem to be an expert on what life as a man is like
@Neill Mcilwaine: when have I ever proclaimed to know what life is like as a man? What gives you the impression that I do? Is it because I know that women and men experience life differently?
@Neill & @LetsDig: Women have it worse than men, lets call a spade a spade. Going on about Veronica not being a mad doesn’t mean she is wrong when she says men in general have it easier.
@LET’S DIG UP THE ROAD!!!: what about asking men* to stop raping and sexually harassing women is getting special rights for women? Why does women not wanting to live in fear of sexualised violence make you so mad?
*some men, for the broflakes among us.
@LET’S DIG UP THE ROAD!!!: yeah all women don’t want to live in fear of being subjected to sexualised, I hope you aren’t living your life under the assumption that women women look forward to sexualised violence.
Also, good ones. “Horrible divisive woman”, “psycho sexist”. Now you just need to write something about how I must have been raped by my father as a child and that I’m ugly and fat and can’t get a man, and you’ll have hit all the same original taking points as the other indignant dudes here.
@Veronica: I’d love to take you out on a date I’d say it would be great crack lol.
@LET’S DIG UP THE ROAD!!!: I don’t claim to be an “advocate” for “my” movement. I’m just one woman who comments online from a radical feminist viewpoint. That in and of itself is enough to draw some pretty gross abuse from men online. Nothing about my “tactics” are inappropriate or offensive, the reason I get so much abuse online from guys like you is because I hit a little too close to home, and lashing out is easier for you to do that possibly face some difficult introspection.
I’m happy to take your vitriol though, I know that women are reading these comments, and that even if they are reticent to open themselves up to this kind of abuse, they’re glad to see someone voicing opinions they also share. So, no. I won’t be “changing my approach” :)
Hmmm. A “SMART Consent Research Team” undertook this research. So, no risk of confirmation bias there.
People definitely experience sexual harassment but I find the 70% figure to be excessive. Thats much higher than the national average and generally college campuses are far safer than the average city street.The publishing of spurious data doesn’t help genuine victims of harassment, it just undermines the genuine cases.
Why would any parent send their child to college thinking there is a 70% chance that they will be harassed. We do need to talk to our children/young people about respect , the effects of drug and alcohol misuse on their decision making. The idea that the school or education system is going to do this is an abdication of parental responsibility.
Also what is gender harassment ? We need to stop making up new terms for people be arseholes or boorish.
Yes you are going to get unwanted attention sometime and this is something as an maturing young adult that you have to learn to deal with. We should be teaching our young people to be strong and brave. Manners makes the man may be old fashioned but it is still true.
@Sean McCann: I work in a bar and get a lot of unwanted attention from older drunk men, that happens. The odd flirty comment who cares. Everyone loves to flirt. It’s when they start grabbing your arse and whispering sexual innuendos in your ear, seeing that your clearly uncomfortable and carrying on when asked to stop numerous times is the problem. And this happens all women on a regular basis in this trade. I barred someone last week for it and was called an uptight prude. There’s a difference between “having a laugh” and taking it too far. I’m not gonna accept that this is something I’ll have to put up with in this trade. Yes it’s a minority of men, most men are decent and respectful. But attitudes do need to change.
@Mollie K: You’ve barred them for being arse holes and proper order too As for grabbing your arse that behavior is not unacceptable. I’m not condoning it.
@Sean McCann: You know I agree with you, attitudes among the arseholes need to change. Making it an issue between genders and saying “men need to change” is probably not the way to go about it.
wen be pinching my bum the whole time
call gender inequality police
Articles here on the subject of sexual harrassment of women, any shape or form of harrassment, results in a lot of men being triggered to the point of anger, vitriolic comments, total denial.
You simply have to go on any women’s pages on FB, like Mna na hEireann,to see what women have to put up with in work, out enjoying themselves, going home.
These days when people are supposed to be more enlightened, things seem to be getting worse for women instead of better.
Some of the comments here prove it.
I’d actually be interested to read the wording of the report itself. 632 students accounts for just 3.5% of NUIGs 18000 students alone and even less when the other University populations are factored in. I think the author of this piece has taken the study out of context for a bit of sensationalism
There’s something not right about this, is there are 20,000 students in NUI and I’m just going to go with a 50/50 gender split, does that mean that at 70% there are 5,400 guys harassing women, but, wait, that figure is lower because 25% atleast are men who are being harassed those in th the 25% aren’t going to be harrassing others because they know how awful it is to be harassed , If it was women, I can’t imagine it would be the 70% who are already being harassed it has to be the other 30% right? so AT 30% there 1,500 people harassing the lads? or 4,400 lads harassing women
Yet another example of weak research to paint a narrative of the evil white male world that we all have to be subjected to. What a complete lot of rubbish. Over identification is the real problem that is going on here. As for sexual harassment, yes it does happen and when it is a genuine case it is abusive and completely unacceptable. But when the masses start to cry wolf for attention it completely diminishes the experience of real victims!!!
@LD: Has it not dawned on you yet that they don’t want your attentions?
Your insinuation that I give unwelcome attention to anybody is made with absolutely no basis and completely wide of the mark. Proving the point that this kind of research is damaging in its hyperbolic underhanded attempt to paint a disproportionate amount of males as sexual deviants
Me too generation
Is it just my phone or do their links always go to a blank page? Can’t see the report, never have any problems with links from comments.
What second level teenagers need is more Booze education than Screws education. The question of Consent or Non-Consent is irrelevant when young partners get smashed in bars and private parties.
100% of sane people are feed up of these stories. But its ok this is not a toxic statement.
And how many male students suffer sexual harrassment from the female students?
Ireland is such a sexist hell hole, sure we’re worse than Saudi Arabia.
@Edward Smith: look over there, look over there!!! Seems to be what you say on most articles really.
If even one person feels harassed, it is one too many. Surely third level students must be made accountable for their behavior. Are alcohol sellers not due criticism for their irresponsible sale of alcohol when clients have had too much? Remove their license to make their profit. Most of all this article fails to investigate what experiences are harassment or even sex education or most of all what constitutes consent.
If even one person feels harassed, it is one too many. Surely third level students must be made accountable for their behavior. Are alcohol sellers not due criticism for their irresponsible sale of alcohol when clients have had too much? Remove their license to make their profit. Most of all this weak journalism fails to investigate what experiences are harassment or even sex education or most of all what constitutes consent.
Medics say age 24 is minimum age to drink and age 55 is age to cease. Alcohol should be a class AAAA drug. (Beer is disgusting)
have your say