What kind of fucking reaction is this ?

[Mosman]

A guy at work has been systematically bullying and harassing me since I started in the company 10 months ago.
Before I joined he did the same to a lady we will call L
Before she joined it was a young graduate called A

So I've finally had the balls to stand up to him, raised the matter with our employer and the reaction of L who could help me ensure this never happens to anyone else ? He won't loose his job over this will he, he's got a family ?

WTF
Has anyone come across this before ? I am fucking furious with her now as well as him.

In men's minds maybe

I believe I said the same thing as ifeelloved - but I am not getting any brighter, failing in analysis and attributing silly remarks to other posters. Hmmmm.....

People of both sexes shy away from conflict, whether at work or at home. It is just as likely to be a personality trait as any social conditioning. As the only person who knows her, Mosman is the only one who could confirm this. The rest is just speculation in order to fit a theory.

I hope you kick his backside Mosman. Bullies are cowards in any walk of life.

Hi messy

I have to say I nearly didn't say anything on this thread as I thought I'd get flamed, glad I was wrong.

I totally get that there are these attitudes out there, the only thing I object to is the sweeping statement that ' this is how things are' when that is not my experience. On a totally different thread, there are huge generalisations being made about Londoners, at other times it might be about northerners, mil or travellers (whatever, it doesn't really matter) and it pisses me off. Maybe this isnt the place to have this discussion, but I believe in challenging something when you see it

But it's not making generalisations about a whole group of people.

It's saying something about a well-documented, well-observed social phenomenon that affects everyone to one degree or another, even if it's only to notice it and reject it.

You noticed and rejected it, ifeel; so did I, so did lots of other women. But many women don't notice it so don't reject it, they internalise it without noticing, other women notice and embrace it (for example for religious reasons), others notice and think they're not affected by it, etc.

"It is just as likely to be a personality trait as any social conditioning". Personality traits are influenced by social conditioning. Where does one start and the other stop?

But it is a generalisation. Further up it was said that women ARE socialised to care more about what happens to men than women.

That is not my experience. Yes I saw my mum behave in that way, but I was never trained to put my dads (or other mens) needs first.

There are selfish men and selfish women. There are women who will put men first and there are those that don't.

"It is just as likely to be a personality trait as any social conditioning". Personality traits are influenced by social conditioning. Where does one start and the other stop?

Basil, absolutely correct, it is not possible to say in this case, or in general terms. Yet that has not stopped people on here immediately jumping to the conclusion that L is one of the downtrodden female underlings crushed by the male conspiracy. Apart from ifeelloved, I don't see anyone acknowledging that it is even a possibility that L just shies away from conflict generally. It has to be someone's fault.

But women as a group ARE socialised to put men's needs before their own. Just because some invidivual women don't succumb to that socialisation, or some individual men put the needs of the women they live with first, doesn't mean the widespread socialisation is non-existent. Just because lots of white people aren't racist, doesn't mean racism doesn't exist, IYSWIM.

People haven't jumped to conclusions Sanjeev, they have offered potential explanations as to why L has responded in such a seemingly unreasonable way, to the OP's situation.

The OP has posted in the FWR section, rather than in employment, or AIBU or chat, so I'm presuming that she wants a feminist perspective on why L may be responding in this way.

So that's what I've tried to contribute.

Of course rasicm exits but not all white people are racist.

I still don't feel that ALL women are socialised to put men's needs before their own. This is not the way I was raised. You can argue it as much as you want, come up with as many case studies as you like, this is not the way I was raised.

Are you raising your children that men's needs should come first?

It sounds as if you are interpreting Basil as claiming that women are overtly, openly trained on purpose that way, ilove.

I think she is referring, at least in part, to the million insidious ways in which we are all, every one of us, socialised/given messages by our culture. Not just by our families or those looking after us/raising us; not just on a conscious, deliberate level. That's what culture is, right? You can't really argue that some people are unaffected by it. Our culture is a patriarchy.

Fortunately we respond in different ways, as your experience proves. Your story is heartening and worth telling, but that is what it is: one story of one individual's response. Not evidence that socialisation does not exist in the first place.

There are a lot of women, a LOT, whose stories turn out a different way and your story doesn't invalidate theirs any more than theirs invalidate yours, IYSWIM. But statistically when patterns show up, they really are worth noting, worth discussing. Not every generalization is sweeping and baseless.

God I hope that makes sense. It is hard stuff to unpick. I am not trying to flame/tear you down, just to be clear.

So, what allows some women to throw off the yoke of the patriarchy (like ilove and Mosman), and yet others are unable to see something so apparent? Certainly ilove does not sound like a dyed-in-the-wool feminist, and was even brought up in an environment where she should have just been another downtrodden female pandering to her 'better' half.

"Of course rasicm exits but not all white people are racist"

Precisely Ifeelloved

That is exactly what I am saying.

Only this time, I'm saying it about women and being socialised to put men's need first.

You appear to be denying that this socialisation exists. While not denying that racism exists. But you understand that the existence of racism, doesn't mean that all white people are racist. I'm not sure why you can't understand that the socialisation men and women undergo about gender roles, doesn't mean that all adhere completely to their gender roles. It's exactly the same as saying that racism exists but not all white people are racist.

At least it is in my mind. But if you want to deny that that socialisation exists for many many women, even though you weren't subject to it, that's your choice of course.

"So, what allows some women to throw off the yoke of the patriarchy (like ilove and Mosman), and yet others are unable to see something so apparent? Certainly ilove does not sound like a dyed-in-the-wool feminist, and was even brought up in an environment where she should have just been another downtrodden female pandering to her 'better' half."

I suspect that you have phrased that in an attempt to highlight how unlikely you think it all sounds, Sanjeev; but taking it at face value, I can only point out that there is no single, universal magic bullet, and that nothing in life is as black-and-white as that question implies.

As for what ilove "should" have been: if I dealt in baseless generalizations , maybe I'd be puzzling over the same point. But I don't. ilove is ilove, and other people are other people.

Imho, in this culture (UK) people are socialised in general to avoid confrontation, even to the point of avoiding some problems all together. It's not the same in all countries and cultures, however. And, that doesn't mean that all people in the UK avoid confrontation, either.

I agree exactly with what Basil says about women being socially conditioned to defer to the needs of men. That doesn't mean that all women do this or do this in all situations, but it is considered the "default setting" for what is considered to be socially acceptable.

What I feel a bit uneasy about is suggesting that because some women don't follow the script they've been given that this makes them somehow better, more capable, less wimpy or whatever than others who don't buck the trend.

Yes I think Ilove would be the best person to answer that; people are individuals and that's why cultures changes isn't it? Because individuals will get together and reject their culture or change it slightly - otherwise, there would be no progress and cultural norms would never change, because no-one would ever have any free will or questioning capacity.

Yes me too Kritique.

I feel it's a subtle way of bigging yourself up compared to other women.

"See how silly they are; I'm much better than them".

Some women (and men) are of course silly, and L may be simply one of them. But there could be all sorts of other things going on, some of which may be cultural (or not) which influence her behaviour.

Basil I have stated quite clearly that I agree that it exists. But i don't think that society as a whole trains women this way. In the same way that I don't think that the whole of society is racist.

Btw it's not just white people who are capable of racism.

DirtyMartini, I have never hidden the fact the the whole 'patriarchy' subtext sits uneasily with me, but every political movement needs it's bogeyman. And this does not make me anti-feminist. I am quite the opposite. I believe in full equality in every walk of life.

As you say, there is no magic bullet that explains everything, and if not everything is black-and-white, then to say that all women are socially conditioned to pander to men's needs above their own is also too simplistic. We are all individuals, having to deal with our own issues.

If the guy in the OP is a bully, he may be getting away with it because he gets his job done. The fact that he does this by bad behaviour rather than good may matter not a jot to the people above him, until it is called out by colleagues at least. It can also be the culture within some companies, which is harder to challenge, and causes people like L to think that it's best to keep quiet. I'd be interested to know from Mosman whether this is the case.

"if not everything is black-and-white, then to say that all women are socially conditioned to pander to men's needs above their own is also too simplistic"

Nobody is saying that all women, without exception, fall in line with this conditioning. You are misrepresenting the argument.

What is being said as far as I can see is that (a) every person is exposed to the trends that shape our culture, (b) male privilege is built into our culture quite fundamentally, and (c) unsurprisingly, this distortion of priorities is one fairly common outcome.

That there's a lot of it about, in essence, and that it might be worth the OP bearing in mind as a possible explanation for her colleague's response.

None of this strikes me as especially controversial, and to keep misrepresenting it as a baseless, sweeping notion with no room for recognition of the individual is to deliberately ignore all the posts that have explicitly clarified it. Which is rather time-wasting and irksome.

Unfortunately I can't copy and paste on this but the comment that I objected to was on basil 1st comment. How women are socialised .... And that we are taught that we are responsible for men's behaviour...

That might be hers and I agree other women's experience but it is not mine and I refuse to accept that I am the only one. I agree that past generations may have been brought up this way but I wasn't and I'm not teaching my girls this either

ifeeloved - You were socialised to put men's needs first. You watched your mum put your dad's needs first. Observing what our parents do is an important part of socilisation. The difference is you rejected that socialisation.

Sanjeev - tbh if you can't see that women are socialised to put men's needs first then I think your understanding of feminism is at a pretty basic level.

And ifeelloved - Your mum didn't have to teach you this. Children learn loads from what they observe

0h ffs. Knew this would happen.

This is why I usually avoid this part of mumsnet

What would happen?