Ed

one of your Councilors who stated "it is my view that we need a privacy policy more than a harassment policy ". I could not disagree more strongly with that statement.

MM: That does not strike me as an accurate statement. My understanding is that there were concerns about how personal information about accusations is handled. According to an approved NCUC statement, we need to be as concerned about the rights of the falsely accused as we are about the victim of SH, because of course we all know, or should know, that the boundaries are not always clear and that people can manipulate or misuse SH charges just as SH abusers can manipulate others in a conference setting.

MM: I'd like to hear more about those details, and less about how strongly you are against SH, Ed. Last time I looked there were no defenders or SH on this list. We need to work together on this issue and not grandstand - one of the most poisonous things about these kinds of issues is that it allows people to beat their chests and proclaim how much they are against "bad things" (sexual harassment, terrorism, child porn, you name it) while obscuring the details about what rights people have and what procedures are justified in response.

(I am reminded of the Republican primary debates, where the candidates vied with each other to say how much they were against ISIS, and how "strong" should be the measures we take against it, but seem to have overlooked any realistic cause-effect relationship between the actions proposed and the factors that have given rise to ISIS in the region - including the Iraq war they all supported. But I digress...)