This isn't quite done yet but I am not going to let this drop.
May 24, 2005
City of Chicago
Commission on Human Relations
740 N. Sedgwick, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60610
RE: Complaint
To Whom It May Concern:
On May 18, 2005 between approximately 9:45pm and 10:00pm, I was walking down Elm Street between Rush Street and LaSalle. A man in a black Mercedes, a newer model, wearing a beige hat, verbally and sexually harassed me for the length of two city blocks. He was following me. He was attempting to converse with me and coax me into his vehicle. He was in communication with another gentleman who was on a bicycle who was also circling/following me before the gentleman in the car approached. I do not know if they knew one another. The man on the bicycle had been following me since I turned off of Rush onto Elm and didn’t stop, and appeared to form an impromptu tag team with the man in the car as he approached. These two men proceeded to harass me until I quite forcefully shouted for them to leave me alone (I had been ignoring them as best I could up as I was listening to my IPOD, up until the point of what I viewed as immediate threat) and darted in front of his car and ran across the street to get away. The two men continued to idle on the corner of Clark and Elm until I ran all the way up to LaSalle. I should not have had to do that and I hope to never have to do that again. I have never seen these two men before. I didn’t notice any weapons but what if I had? Wanting to disengage from the situation they were involuntarily making me a participant in, I ran, so neglecting to recognize a license plate number. However, I can recognize sexual harassment.
I live in this neighborhood, in an apartment on LaSalle between Division and Maple. As the weather warms, I anticipate even more harassment as this unfortunately tends to happen more as the weather gets warmer. There is no excuse for this type of verbal battery towards women. There is no reason why the ushering of summer weather should also bring a rash of sexual harassment.
That night, I wasn’t dressed “suggestively” at all; I was, in fact, still in the clothes I wore to work that day. But it shouldn’t be dependent on the woman to cover herself in head to toe robes to avoid this type of abuse. Regardless of how a woman clothes herself, there isn’t and shouldn’t ever be this type of harassment. Cat-calling and verbal aggravation of women shouldn’t ever have to be tolerated, and as I saw that night, that type of language seems to be a dangerous precursor to crimes against women. The frustration and anger that these men displayed because I refused to comply was paramount.
Public sexual harassment, as well as sexual assault, is a real and active problem within the city, and any signs of endangerment or threats towards women, including verbal sexual harassment, cannot and shouldn’t be tolerated. Because of this, and many other incidences, I no longer feel safe in my neighborhood or in the city itself. I worry that these two men know where I live, and I shouldn’t feel as though I cannot walk in my own neighborhood. If it isn’t these two specific men, there are always scores more that feel entitled to being able to comment on my body—any woman’s body for that matter—largely because there isn’t and hasn’t been any type of enforcement which validates the women who have to tolerate this type of abuse. This is not acceptable. By not instituting an ordinance to protect women, you are silently accepting and tolerating this type of harassment.
The City of Chicago must issue an ordinance which will allow the female residents of the City of Chicago to feel safe and accounted for when they walk down the public streets. It is considered harassment for individuals to attack others based on racial, sexual, or religious orientation. The fact that women, regardless of racial, sexual, or religious orientation, are subjected to blatant sexual harassment every day cannot be tolerated by a city like Chicago, which professes to provide, as best they can, an equal, safe, and protected environment for their residents.
I am not attempting to make this into a legal matter but the City doesn’t provide any other type of outlet for this type of complaint, which is indicative of the amount of protection that the women of Chicago have in regards to this harassment. The City needs to take a serious look at the creation of a City ordinance which penalizes those individuals who engage is public sexual harassment. The ordinance regarding sexual harassment in the work place makes it very clear as to the City’s disapproving and no-tolerance policy for sexual harassment and the City streets shouldn’t be any different; in fact, they should be more protected. As far as enforcement is concerned, the City should examine how it enforces existing harassment policies.
The ordinances below encompass the dedication the City has to protecting the public from sexual harassment. However, it does not speak to the general public, inhabiting in any way the City of Chicago proper:
2-160-020
"Public accommodation" means a place, business establishment or agency that sells, leases, provides or offers any product, facility or service to the general public, regardless of ownership or operation (i) by a public body or agency; (ii) for or without regard to profit; or (iii) for a fee or not for a fee. An institution, club, association or other place of accommodation which has more than 400 members, and provides regular meal service and regularly receives payment for dues, fees, accommodations, facilities or services from or on behalf of nonmembers for the furtherance of trade or business shall be considered a place of public accommodation for purposes of this chapter.
"Sexual harassment" means any unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or conduct of a sexual nature when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment; or (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for any employment decision affecting the individual; or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.
2-160-040
No employer, employee, agent of an employer, employment agency or labor organization shall engage in sexual harassment. An employer shall be liable for sexual harassment by nonemployees or nonmanagerial and nonsupervisory employees only if the employer becomes aware of the conduct and fails to take reasonable corrective measures.
I have considered writing about why sexual harassment is a dangerous and documented precursor to sexual assault but the linear connection should be clear; rape is often times a crime that is committed against women by men who feel that it is acceptable for them to have whatever they want from a woman, including sex, at any time. Power, lust, and a female-hatred are a part of why rape happens as well, and it is likely a part of why sexual harassment occurs too. They are connected. These derogatory communications with women on the street are in direct relation to rape, and are not off limits when verbally addressing them—yet. Men appear to feel that the city streets are a free space for them to conduct themselves however they may feel, be it raping a woman on a CTA car or being able to walk down a city street and verbally rape her without any recourse.
Statements like “what are we going to do”, “that’s just the way it is”, and “there’s nothing we can do about it” have too often been the deterrent from penalizing for men who engage in sexual harassment. You would never tell an individual who suffers from racial harassment to simply accept that type of behavior because there is nothing the City can do. The City has done something about other types of harassment and it needs to institute something here as well. To neglect to examine this problem would be a grave injustice for all women who reside in Chicago and leave, as it is now, wide open the possibility for crimes against women to occur.
I have enclosed some documents with regard to public (sexual) harassment, to illustrate that this is a problem that has a dialogue, that is real, and needs to be combated against. I urge you to contact me with regard to this complaint. I am more than willing to take whatever necessary steps to begin our own city dialogue about the place, and the penalties, for this type of harassment on our city streets. Female solidarity regarding this harassment can only go so far in stopping it, and for the City to truly speak out in protection of all of its residents, to illustrate its commitment of making as much of the city a safe space, and to prove that it is dedicated to combating violence against women, I urge you to draft ordinances penalizing individuals who engage in public sexual harassment. To neglect to do so makes the City a respondent in the crimes that women suffer in this city every day.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Cherie Getchell
Enclosures
May 24, 2005
City of Chicago
Commission on Human Relations
740 N. Sedgwick, 3rd Floor
Chicago, IL 60610
RE: Complaint
To Whom It May Concern:
On May 18, 2005 between approximately 9:45pm and 10:00pm, I was walking down Elm Street between Rush Street and LaSalle. A man in a black Mercedes, a newer model, wearing a beige hat, verbally and sexually harassed me for the length of two city blocks. He was following me. He was attempting to converse with me and coax me into his vehicle. He was in communication with another gentleman who was on a bicycle who was also circling/following me before the gentleman in the car approached. I do not know if they knew one another. The man on the bicycle had been following me since I turned off of Rush onto Elm and didn’t stop, and appeared to form an impromptu tag team with the man in the car as he approached. These two men proceeded to harass me until I quite forcefully shouted for them to leave me alone (I had been ignoring them as best I could up as I was listening to my IPOD, up until the point of what I viewed as immediate threat) and darted in front of his car and ran across the street to get away. The two men continued to idle on the corner of Clark and Elm until I ran all the way up to LaSalle. I should not have had to do that and I hope to never have to do that again. I have never seen these two men before. I didn’t notice any weapons but what if I had? Wanting to disengage from the situation they were involuntarily making me a participant in, I ran, so neglecting to recognize a license plate number. However, I can recognize sexual harassment.
I live in this neighborhood, in an apartment on LaSalle between Division and Maple. As the weather warms, I anticipate even more harassment as this unfortunately tends to happen more as the weather gets warmer. There is no excuse for this type of verbal battery towards women. There is no reason why the ushering of summer weather should also bring a rash of sexual harassment.
That night, I wasn’t dressed “suggestively” at all; I was, in fact, still in the clothes I wore to work that day. But it shouldn’t be dependent on the woman to cover herself in head to toe robes to avoid this type of abuse. Regardless of how a woman clothes herself, there isn’t and shouldn’t ever be this type of harassment. Cat-calling and verbal aggravation of women shouldn’t ever have to be tolerated, and as I saw that night, that type of language seems to be a dangerous precursor to crimes against women. The frustration and anger that these men displayed because I refused to comply was paramount.
Public sexual harassment, as well as sexual assault, is a real and active problem within the city, and any signs of endangerment or threats towards women, including verbal sexual harassment, cannot and shouldn’t be tolerated. Because of this, and many other incidences, I no longer feel safe in my neighborhood or in the city itself. I worry that these two men know where I live, and I shouldn’t feel as though I cannot walk in my own neighborhood. If it isn’t these two specific men, there are always scores more that feel entitled to being able to comment on my body—any woman’s body for that matter—largely because there isn’t and hasn’t been any type of enforcement which validates the women who have to tolerate this type of abuse. This is not acceptable. By not instituting an ordinance to protect women, you are silently accepting and tolerating this type of harassment.
The City of Chicago must issue an ordinance which will allow the female residents of the City of Chicago to feel safe and accounted for when they walk down the public streets. It is considered harassment for individuals to attack others based on racial, sexual, or religious orientation. The fact that women, regardless of racial, sexual, or religious orientation, are subjected to blatant sexual harassment every day cannot be tolerated by a city like Chicago, which professes to provide, as best they can, an equal, safe, and protected environment for their residents.
I am not attempting to make this into a legal matter but the City doesn’t provide any other type of outlet for this type of complaint, which is indicative of the amount of protection that the women of Chicago have in regards to this harassment. The City needs to take a serious look at the creation of a City ordinance which penalizes those individuals who engage is public sexual harassment. The ordinance regarding sexual harassment in the work place makes it very clear as to the City’s disapproving and no-tolerance policy for sexual harassment and the City streets shouldn’t be any different; in fact, they should be more protected. As far as enforcement is concerned, the City should examine how it enforces existing harassment policies.
The ordinances below encompass the dedication the City has to protecting the public from sexual harassment. However, it does not speak to the general public, inhabiting in any way the City of Chicago proper:
2-160-020
"Public accommodation" means a place, business establishment or agency that sells, leases, provides or offers any product, facility or service to the general public, regardless of ownership or operation (i) by a public body or agency; (ii) for or without regard to profit; or (iii) for a fee or not for a fee. An institution, club, association or other place of accommodation which has more than 400 members, and provides regular meal service and regularly receives payment for dues, fees, accommodations, facilities or services from or on behalf of nonmembers for the furtherance of trade or business shall be considered a place of public accommodation for purposes of this chapter.
"Sexual harassment" means any unwelcome sexual advances or requests for sexual favors or conduct of a sexual nature when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment; or (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for any employment decision affecting the individual; or (3) such conduct has the purpose or effect of substantially interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile or offensive working environment.
2-160-040
No employer, employee, agent of an employer, employment agency or labor organization shall engage in sexual harassment. An employer shall be liable for sexual harassment by nonemployees or nonmanagerial and nonsupervisory employees only if the employer becomes aware of the conduct and fails to take reasonable corrective measures.
I have considered writing about why sexual harassment is a dangerous and documented precursor to sexual assault but the linear connection should be clear; rape is often times a crime that is committed against women by men who feel that it is acceptable for them to have whatever they want from a woman, including sex, at any time. Power, lust, and a female-hatred are a part of why rape happens as well, and it is likely a part of why sexual harassment occurs too. They are connected. These derogatory communications with women on the street are in direct relation to rape, and are not off limits when verbally addressing them—yet. Men appear to feel that the city streets are a free space for them to conduct themselves however they may feel, be it raping a woman on a CTA car or being able to walk down a city street and verbally rape her without any recourse.
Statements like “what are we going to do”, “that’s just the way it is”, and “there’s nothing we can do about it” have too often been the deterrent from penalizing for men who engage in sexual harassment. You would never tell an individual who suffers from racial harassment to simply accept that type of behavior because there is nothing the City can do. The City has done something about other types of harassment and it needs to institute something here as well. To neglect to examine this problem would be a grave injustice for all women who reside in Chicago and leave, as it is now, wide open the possibility for crimes against women to occur.
I have enclosed some documents with regard to public (sexual) harassment, to illustrate that this is a problem that has a dialogue, that is real, and needs to be combated against. I urge you to contact me with regard to this complaint. I am more than willing to take whatever necessary steps to begin our own city dialogue about the place, and the penalties, for this type of harassment on our city streets. Female solidarity regarding this harassment can only go so far in stopping it, and for the City to truly speak out in protection of all of its residents, to illustrate its commitment of making as much of the city a safe space, and to prove that it is dedicated to combating violence against women, I urge you to draft ordinances penalizing individuals who engage in public sexual harassment. To neglect to do so makes the City a respondent in the crimes that women suffer in this city every day.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Sincerely,
Cherie Getchell
Enclosures