I just watched the video of Katie saying that to Andy Cohen. It clearly was a joke.
^I think COHEN was joking. I don’t think Katie was. Her part was a little awkward IMO.
I took it as a joke as well, and will be interested in hearing what Katie says about it now.
Neither men **nor ** women should operate in a fear environment. Anyone repeatedly saying the woman should thwart, hold back, or leave their jobs doesn’t seem to be saying it’s the aggressor’s behavior that’s the core problem.
I didn’t have trouble in a man’s work world, either. But I could tell you what did happen to me and others. This isn’t about strong vs weak or dumb gals. It’s about a pervasive problem.
Whether or not some see it.
So again, it would be nice to focus on the core problem, not the women who experienced unwanted moves.
(If lots of women dismiss this in discussions, it goes nowhere, same as in the past.)
And btw, when they asked if I could type, I said yes, because I could. But I was not going for a typist position. In fact, in my field, we all had to have keyboard skills.
Not at all awkward. And it wasn’t a complaint. It was a direct response to a question…complete with a perfectly timed comedic pause.
@sevmom She was asked by many, many sources for clarity. I’m sure Katie and Meredith will speak when ready.
I didn’t see it as awkward either. It will be more interesting to me if and when Katie and/ or Meredith speak about their relationship with Lauer and what they think about his termination.
@sevmom Well, Katie could clarify at any time that it was a simple joke. No response yet though many sources asked a few days ago. Meredith and then Katie are the two I really want to hear from.
I think if you really get into it, you might find that Meredith and Katie have been known to make raunchy comments themselves. Jokes about male coworkers, penis size, etc.
Wow… I work as a consultant in corporate America, and have worked for many companies over the years and seen some bad behavior. The ONE thing I know about them is that they do not want bad publicity, and will brush off/hide/cover up ANYTHING that looks bad. If they can get away with a “aw, honey, all he did was pinch your behind” or “you must have asked for it” or making you sound nuts or whatever else they can do, THEY WILL. Just like the Catholic church did with the even worse behavior of their employees.
And why should the WOMAN (intern) have to be looking for a new job because the talent was a horndog and behaved badly? The person who behaves badly should be called out and should be the one who leaves.
Stop sticking up for badly behaved males.
@sevmom Let me know if they get accused of assaulting people until they pass out and sending men unwanted pictures of their female parts. Then we can get into it.
Of course, men are more likely to physically assault someone. He may very well have done so but we don’t have all the facts yet . Unfortunately, in this day and age, both men and women have been known to send pictures and make lewd comments. There is definitely change brewing with all of this and that’s a good thing. I certainly don’t condone harassment. Some industries/work cultures seem to have more tolerance than others for joking/lewdness.
I never said she had to leave her job…I said she didn’t leave the job so must have reconciled her situation. If someone found their work situation intolerable most people would leave at the first chance.
I worked in hr for a very large Global company for five years over a decade ago and I can emphatically say no one ever, ever blew off a complaint ever even ten years ago. We found ourselves in court over a number of issues but never sexual harassment. No one would ever dare to talk to an employee in anything other than in a factual and pragmatic manner. The companies you are consulting for sound like targets for lawsuits and That said perhaps the media industry has had their heads stuck in the sand for the past decade or so.
Nor would I. But I would also not appear on national television and endorse someone who had just sent texts and pictures that were so objectionable that they led to his termination from a national network. I would offer my support privately so any risk of me being wrong about this person would not be assumed by someone else.
Given the allegations I am going to be more cautious with this friend and see how things develop. Why would I publicly endorse someone on national television when at present I would not trust him with my own daughter? I take my recommendations of people seriously and understand that others rely on the reference I’ve given them.
And 99.99 + of people, including probably all of us, are never going to be put in a position where we have to go on the air on “national television” right after we have been told a long time colleague has been terminated . They clearly said they did not have the details and I think , given that, they handled it well. All of his coworkers that morning were noticeably shaken.
Going on air or endorsing someone to your social circle is all the same to me-- I would do neither under the circumstances in the Lauer case. If he was a personal friend I would offer support privately to him and/or the family but would most certainly not endorse publicly given the evidence that was produced to NBC.
People rely on references that’s why they ask for them.
Do you really think they had the choice/ were given the choice to go on air or not with this? They did not have all the details, they said that, and also showed support for those that had made allegations and those that might come forward later. What else do you think they should have done?
If it is true they did not have all the facts (and I think it was reported that they did) then if it were me I would have made the announcement and stuck to the facts as they were known to me at the time.
And that is pretty much what they did, as they also did on CBS with Charlie Rose
Somewhere, Ann Curry is…
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/somewhere-ann-curry-matt-lauer_us_5a1ec48de4b0cb0e917d1312