This episode walks us through Catherine Claxton’s story, which has been assembled by G@W Senior Associate Joanne Sandler and Julie Thompson, both long time UN staffers. Catherine’s lawyers — Mary Dorman and Ellen Yaroshefsky — recount the events that led Catherine, a junior UN staffer, to charge an Undersecretary General with sexual abuse. What unfolded in response mirrors the Me Too stories of today. Patriarchy closed ranks around the perpetrator and demanded allegiance to authority from those in the system; attempts were made to discredit the complainant – in this case, Catherine – and bury her in bureaucratic legalese as she sought to use the existing mechanisms and processes of adjudication to seek justice; and when all the evidence was in and a third party judgement came in favoring her, the UN buried the report. Finally the perpetrator was fired and was given a glorious send off. Sound familiar? Is this what justice looks like in cases of sexual harassment and abuse? How do we impeach patriarchy and hold it accountable?
Senator Hanson-Young said she was “pleased with the court’s decision”.
“When men do the wrong thing, they should apologise. Most men do. But when they don’t they should be called out,” she said.
“It’s for every woman and girl who’s been told or made to stay silent in the face of harassment and disrespect that I took legal action.
RLC head of police accountability Samantha Lee said: “We know strip searches are causing great harm to the community and now we have the Deputy State Coroner confirming that this invasive practice is having a devastating impact on young lives.”
“The proposed changes recommended by the Deputy Coroner are far from radical, but merely reflect parliament’s original intent that such an invasive procedure be only utilised in the most exceptional of legal circumstances.
Jessica “Jonathan” Yaniv, who infamously brought human rights complaints against multiple British Columbia estheticians for declining to perform services on her male genitals has lost her cases.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms today issued a news release declaring victory on behalf of their clients, as an early ruling in favour of the mostly home-based salon workers was announced just one day after the Canadian federal elections.According to the news release, The decision noted, “human rights legislation does not require a service provider to wax a type of genitals they are not trained for and have not consented to wax.”
The decision further found that Yaniv “engaged in improper conduct,” “filed complaints for improper purposes,” and concluded Yaniv’s testimony was “disingenuous and self-serving.” Finally, noted the Tribunal, Yaniv was “evasive and argumentative and contradicted herself” while giving evidence.
Most significantly, the Tribunal ordered costs of $2,000 payable each to three of the five women represented by the Justice Centre, including one woman, Mrs. Hehar Gill, who had been forced to close her business due to Yaniv’s vexatious litigation.
When it comes to addressing sexual harassment in law, Australia’s first female prime minister says we must focus on solutions that will create safer and more productive working environments, writes Samantha Mangwana.
She said multiple universities in the US had recently introduced software allowing users to lodge an encrypted and timestamped record of their harassment. Users can then decide whether to upwardly refer the incident to trigger an investigation. The most interesting aspect of this online reporting tool is the optional repeat offender matching system, which connects users who make complaints about the same alleged perpetrator.
“This ensures the victim has the option to report harassment as part of a group,” Ms Gillard said.
These online reporting tools are also accessible from anywhere, allowing users to engage on their own terms, when it suits them. They are also becoming increasingly common. In fact, the NSW Legal Services Commissioner is about to launch one of its own, specifically focusing on sexual harassment and bullying.
Exclusive: voice assistant’s responses were rewritten so it never says word ‘feminism’
An internal project to rewrite how Apple’s Siri voice assistant handles “sensitive topics” such as feminism and the #MeToo movement advised developers to respond in one of three ways: “don’t engage”, “deflect” and finally “inform”.
The project saw Siri’s responses explicitly rewritten to ensure that the service would say it was in favour of “equality”, but never say the word feminism – even when asked direct questions about the topic.
Previously, Siri’s answers included more explicitly dismissive responses such as “I just don’t get this whole gender thing,” and, “My name is Siri, and I was designed by Apple in California. That’s all I’m prepared to say.”
A similar sensitivity rewrite occurred for topics related to the #MeToo movement, apparently triggered by criticism of Siri’s initial responses to sexual harassment. Once, when users called Siri a “slut”, the service responded: “I’d blush if I could.” Now, a much sterner reply is offered: “I won’t respond to that.”
- Thirty per cent of all strip searches result in a criminal charge
- One 21-year-old woman told the ABC she had been strip searched six times by police
- A police spokesperson said all recruits were taught how to undertake a strip search
An Anchorage civil rights panel cannot enforce an anti-discrimination ordinance against a battered women’s shelter that refused to admit a trans-woman, a federal court in Alaska ruled.
“Downtown Hope Center serves everyone, but women deserve a safe place to stay overnight,” said lawyer Kate Anderson of the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), a public interest law practice that represents Hope Center. “No woman — particularly not an abuse survivor — should be forced to sleep or disrobe next to a man. The court’s order will allow the center to continue in its duty to protect the vulnerable women it serves while this lawsuit moves forward.”
Encouraging major brands to pull their marketing spend from a major media platform like Jones’ radio program is no small feat and there are 55,000 witches around Australia to thank for it.
The page’s name was inspired by the famous text message federal MP Peter Dutton accidentally sent to political editor Samantha Maiden in which he described her as a ‘mad fucking witch’.
Within a few days 20,000 ‘witches’ had signed up. The group, which continually highlights government and societal misogyny: from the lack of women in government positions, to asylum seeker issues, Indigenous issues, cuts to women’s family violence services and cuts to women’s medical services, now has 55,000 followers. A number of volunteers work alongside Hill to manage the page.
The ad showed three offers, two of them were for a bottle of wine and a chocolate bar. But the third added a pack of condoms to the “combo” worth 199 Mexican pesos ($10; £8).
The text above it reads: “Happy day to all the secretaries. Celebrate with them the proper way with this executive combo.”
The word used for secretary in the ad is “secretaria”, which is female in Spanish and therefore would only be taken to apply to women. Further down, the word “executive combo” is followed by the suggestive phrase in English in brackets: “If you know what I mean”.
In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority has banned sexist ads.