Quote:
|
Originally Posted by meembo
willravel -- that was a whopper of a double negative on my part! I'm not sure what I said either. I'm sorry I didn't make myself clear enough.
|
I've had a few whoppers in my time, don't worry about it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by meembo
The original question was whether children are capable of sexual harassment. I think it is possible and that it occurs, with sexually-oriented behavior that is used in a power relationship. I think that someone's hands in someone else's pants is undeniably a sexual behavior in the context we are discussing.
|
Well are we speaking purely behavior, or arewetalking about intent? If we are talking about behavior, you could look at it as sexual in nature. If we are talking about intent, however, the question is a bit more complex.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by meembo
"Sexual" matters are varied, and include carnal desire, anatomical growth and maturity, reproductive mechanics, and even gender role issuses. I think the confusing issue might be the aspect of sexual gratification, which I am glad you brought up. I don't assert that a 7 year old consciously or deliberately seeks sexual gratification in this way. However, I think that the term "sexual" here is most appropriate to describe the anatomical area and social behavioral issue that we seek to educate kids about.
|
I do not disagree.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by meembo
In your hypothetical, the behavior is sexual in nature, even if the boy can't articulate what he is doing and why. A child isn't culpable in the same way a mature adult is for the same behavior (because of the understandings of intent and consequence), but the behavior is centered on areas of the body that have particular significance anatomically and socially. I readily concede your point that the behavior may not be about sexual gratification. I think taboos and shock effect are certainly part of the behavior -- which again, focuses on sexual organs, in this case. I think your last sentence -- "I suspect that it could simply be that he recognises that the effect of such an action will be attention, and therefore the reward for the action would be attention, not of sexual gratification." -- is correct, but not complete, and even if the kid is intellectually unaware of the specific sexual threat, is is still nonetheless a sexual threat.
|
It is a sexual threat to the victim, absolutely. Let me put it this way...If I accedentally graze a womans thigh at work, without any sexual intention conscious or subconscious, am I guilty of sexual harassment?