/ 2 July 1999

The incredible lightness of PCing

Loose cannon Robert Kirby Herebelow a look at what is nowadays considered to be unacceptable behaviour in the office, as sent to me anonymously by someone at a well-known South African insurance company. Apparently these guidelines are extracted from some sort of behavioural manual being supplied – by heaven only knows who – to employers. The manual is a compendium of what is considered politically incorrect, including much about how problems of race and gender might be handled by “caring” employers.

But best of all is the section dealing with definitions of sexual harassment. These have been adopted and circulated to all its office staff by the insurance company. Here they are:

Physical contact; verbal innuendoes; suggestions, hints and comments with sexual overtones; sexually orientated jokes; unwelcome graphic comments about a person’s body; inappropriate queries about a person’s sex life; unwelcome gestures; indecent exposure or so-called “flashing”; unwelcome display of sexually explicit pictures, objects and desk-toys; lingering nearby or use of the opposite gender’s toilet facilities; continuous idle chatter of a sexual nature; suggestive or insulting sounds to include the “humorous” breaking of wind; sexual looks, such as leering or ogling with suggestive overtones; holding or eating food provocatively, unwanted hugging, touching or stroking; requiring to wear sexist and revealing, or suggestive uniforms, material or buttons.

Can you imagine the disciplinary meeting when some poor office grunt gets hauled up and given his first official warning? Can you hear Ms Chairperson starting off, sternly addressing a young Claims Assistant.

“You have been formally advised of your rights in this disciplinary hearing which is being held in terms of this company’s Office Code of Behaviour Amendment Memorandum of 99-03-09, hereinafter referred to as the OCOBAM. The specifics of the complaint made against you are that, on or about 11h22 last Thursday, 99-06-25, you did spend part of your working hours lingering near your opposite gender’s toilet facility after which you entered the precincts of your opposite gender’s toilet facility where you leered and ogled, making graphic comments about your opposite gender person’s body and breaking wind while wearing a suggestive button stating `Have a Nice Day – Fuck Someone’. How do you plead?”

“Not guilty.”

To which Ms Chairperson replies. “Have you anything to say in your defence?”

“Indeed I have,” says the Claims Assistant forcefully, clearly not prepared to be browbeaten. “While I admit to having strayed into the ladies’ can it was only because there was an unwelcome display of sexually explicit pictures of a homosexual nature being handed around in the men’s bogger along with continuous idle chatter of an unwelcome sexual nature. I wasn’t going to risk dragging my dwang out in there.”

“What then would be your response to the further complaint that while you were in your opposite gender’s toilet facility you indulged in indecent exposure and so-called `flashing’?”

Leaping to his feet the Claims Assistant declares, “That’s an entirely false verbal innuendo. You have to take your schlong out to have a leak. I already told you the men’s head was swarming with suggestions, hints and comments with unwelcome sexual overtones. I had no choice in the matter but to try to take a slash somewhere else.”

Ms Chairperson deliberates angrily for a moment then drops an innocent sounding trick question. “Was your breaking of wind intended to be humorous in nature?”

“No, it was a mistake. I got quite a fright myself.”

“Ah,” snaps Ms Chairperson, “but it is also said that at the time, in flagrant violation of the OCOBAM, you were wearing sexist and revealing clothing and eating a banana provocatively.”

“It was not a real banana, it was a desk- toy in the shape of a banana sent out by the Natal Building Society.”

“The complainant person states that not only were you making unwelcome gestures with this banana-like desk-toy but you also made inappropriate queries about her sex life and offered to give her one giant thrust for mankind?”

“I merely lightly enquired of the complainant whether she had ever been the victim of any unwanted hugging.”

“There was no indecent exposure or unwanted stroking involved?”

“Have you looked at her closely?”

“Did you happened to tell the complainant any sexually oriented jokes?”

“Only the one about why don’t witches wear knickers?”

At which point the disciplinary hearing is adjourned for an in loco inspection of the chairperson’s perineum.