attractive workers and your DH

[Anonymous]

Don't feed the troll. LOL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

Why should we answer your question when you’re openly disrespectful of another point of view? I think the PP who said don’t feed the troll was right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

No it is not incumbent on male leadership.

[Anonymous]

I am as liberal as they come but seriously...I am going to feel differently if my husband is out late with a young attractive woman even if it's business vs if it's a young man. It's not just optics but human nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't feed the troll. LOL

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

No it is not incumbent on male leadership.

How not?

Evidently it doesn’t matter to men that there is not parity for women. Probably - likely, certainly - men are simply not interested in having women reach parity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

This isn’t about being a mentor. This is about being men being solo in social situations with women. You can be a mentor without that dynamic, which carries a risk for men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While my wife doesn't get a say in who my company hires to work for me (obviously), she does not want me to have dinner or drinks with my female subordinates. I think it's petty but it's not worth the fight. So I do lunch with the women (in groups only) and drinks with the men.

Is that you Mike P?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While my wife doesn't get a say in who my company hires to work for me (obviously), she does not want me to have dinner or drinks with my female subordinates. I think it's petty but it's not worth the fight. So I do lunch with the women (in groups only) and drinks with the men.

In many studies it's been show that attitudes like this is why women do not advance in their careers. Men refuse to network with them or mentor them because of their incontrollable loins or their jealous wives.

Don't ask for a link just google it please.

This. You are explicitly treating subordinates different based on gender and drinks are a much better chance to bond than lunch

Tough luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

This isn’t about being a mentor. This is about being men being solo in social situations with women. You can be a mentor without that dynamic, which carries a risk for men.

Exactly. Most women can advance in their careers without going to dinner alone with their bosses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

No it is not incumbent on male leadership.

How not?

Evidently it doesn’t matter to men that there is not parity for women. Probably - likely, certainly - men are simply not interested in having women reach parity.

LOL it is men’s job to promote young women over other men at work? No men do not have an obligation to promote women at work. Men should do the job they are paid to do and not worry about genders parity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For everyone who keeps suggesting that men are opening themselves up to liability by mentoring one gender and not the other, you're missing a key component in the risk analysis.

If a man is accused of treating women differently by not mentoring them, the woman files a discrimination complaint and is required to prove her claim.

If a woman accuses a man of an inappropriate overture, true or not, the accusation is the conviction and that man's career will be forever affected by that.

In the final analysis, many men would rather take their chances with a jury in the court system than be convicted by accusation.

Do you really feel that you cannot be one on one with a female colleague without making an inappropriate overture?

Or do you think that women are just crazily accusing random men of sexual harassment/assault?
And if the women are just crazy, then what does it matter if you *really* met 1:1 with them or not? Couldn’t they accuse you either way? In fact, wouldn’t it be LESS likely that they would accuse someone they know to be kind and respectful vs someone they just see around the office?

DP. +1. I don't understand this attitude at all. Men who feel this way appear to think either (1) they don't understand how to interact with women without harassing them, or (2) there is a significant risk that a woman will falsely accuse them of sexual harassment (why?). Somehow I make it through my days without sexually harassing people, nor have I ever been falsely accused of doing so. And yet this baseline level of professional competency somehow eludes large numbers of men.

It is the risk/reward though. And yes, lots of guys think lots of women make up claims of harassment or otherwise inappropriate behavior when they are mad about things. Whether true or not, there is very little upside to these one-on-one interactions for a higher-up, and a huge downside risk, even if the probability is low.

And my guess is that you are a woman, so you don't get the dynamic.

Because I'm a woman, I must not understand workplace dynamics between men and women? With an attitude like that, I can see why you personally are reluctant to interact with women in the workplace. There are no data to support the idea that lots of women invent claims of sexual harassment at work. I've personally never seen such a claim, true or untrue, become public knowledge or result in any consequences, and I've been in biglaw for 13 years. As with rape, there are vastly more incidents that are never reported than there are instances of false reporting. If you feel like a target, there's probably a good reason for that.

Scary to think you are in Big Law with reasoning skills like that.

First, this isn't about "dynamics between men and women". It is about whether it is reasonable for a man to fear a false accusation. As a woman, you can't understand that. Sorry to be the one to tell you. Just like a man is not going to understand a woman's fear about certain other situations.

Second, whether or not there are lots of instances of false reporting, there is a perception among men that it is a risk. Just look at this thread if you don't believe me. Ask a male friend or colleague who you think will tell you the truth.

Third, even if the risk of a false report is very low, the loss of reputation that would result is not worth any benefits of whatever the one-one-one interaction will bring. This is the B > P*L you learned about it law school. Why risk it? What is the magnitude of the benefit to a male in management of mentoring the female subordinate in a one-on-one situation? Very small.

But that's my point - it isn't "reasonable." There is no rational basis for this view, and it is hardly universal. My husband is a partner in a different firm (not law) and does not have this fear. He has had multiple female and male mentees over the years (and mentors, for that matter, when he was more junior). I have also had male and female mentors and mentees. The reason to "risk" it (again, acknowledging they the actual risk here is virtually nil) is because it's the right thing to do, to help create equal opportunities for men and women.

So we disagree on the risk. You continue to have private meetings with the opposite sex, I’ll continue to only have public meetings and let’s both respect each other’s views.

My concern is not about whether or not to have private meetings, but about mentoring more broadly. Surely there is an approach that permits men in positions of authority to provide this valuable guidance to junior women and men in a way that doesn't make them uncomfortable or disadvantage women. No one is suggesting mentoring should take place in, like, hotel rooms or other non-public spaces. But it is incumbent on the largely male leadership of today's workplaces to figure out a way to ensure access to equal opportunities for female employees, and I have a hard time seeing how golfing/getting a drink or a meal in a public restaurant/going for coffee/etc. creates risk for men, even if we stipulate that their irrational fear is subjectively real.

No it is not incumbent on male leadership.

How not?

Evidently it doesn’t matter to men that there is not parity for women. Probably - likely, certainly - men are simply not interested in having women reach parity.

LOL it is men’s job to promote young women over other men at work? No men do not have an obligation to promote women at work. Men should do the job they are paid to do and not worry about genders parity.

Those in positions of leadership have an obligation to provide equal opportunities to all qualified employees.

[Anonymous]

One of my coworkers had an eye for pretty younger women. He was a medical resident and would always be hanging out with the young nurses and support staff. His wife would be constantly on his case, always texting him. They had 3 little kids. We thought she was paranoid and he kept saying she was. He moved on to another job and we lost contact until a few years later when I noticed everyone whispering in the break room one day. It turned out that he had been fired from his hospital position for inappropriate behavior after someone complained. I guess his wife was right all along.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am as liberal as they come but seriously...I am going to feel differently if my husband is out late with a young attractive woman even if it's business vs if it's a young man. It's not just optics but human nature.

I agree with you and it’s how rumors get started. Two years ago word got to me from a “friend” that my husband was seen in a restaurant with a very attractive younger woman and they seemed to be really enjoying themselves. The young woman was our daughter but I’m sure my “friend” told others and didn’t bother to correct the story.