TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: "Sex. Harassment" - The End From:"Chas. Bosdet" <WLFTRIX -at- AOL -dot- COM> Date:Tue, 9 May 1995 16:02:38 -0400
On 5/9 Karen Kay wrote:
> I'm breaking my silence on this topic because many of you seem
> to be working under a misapprehension. I think it's important for
> y'all to realize that I did not accuse Vince of sexual harassment.
> Chas brought this into the conversation as if I were accusing
> Vince, but I made no such accusation. It's fine for you to discuss
> whether this is sexual harassment or not; I personally believe it
> is not.
I stand corrected if I misunderstood Karen's original post on 5/6, which
said, in context (since it seems context is important here):
> If we were working together and you [Vince] said this, and did not
> apologize for being rude and denigrating, it's the kind of thing
> I would go to a supervisor over. It's the kind of statement that
> smacks of sexual harassment and makes me want to slap
> your face.
Under the principle of interpretation asserted here, then, if someone writes,
"The statement smacks of disingenuousness," it would be wrong to think he or
she is accusing the author of a lack of candor.
Is that a reasonable interpretation in everyday discourse? Maybe so. Maybe
not -- which goes to the heart of why this discussion began:
Subsequent posts clearly showed people interpreting the original offending
comment differently, **but no one questioned for a moment whether its author
had been accused of sexual harassment,** based on reading the original post
and/or the 5/6 quote (above) that was provided at the outset of discussion.
If a writer should exercise care and sensitivity in using a childhood retort,
*is it unreasonable* to suggest that an adult should be *at least* as careful
and sensitive when brandishing loaded terms of far greater consequence,
whether it's in the workplace (consider that scenario for a moment) or on
At this point *that* is the point, the whole point, and nothing but the