^I’m wondering if there are specific cases you are referring to? It seems like we are seeing accusers in the media, so who is hiding?
Newspapers and traditional media outlets are very careful to source and verify their stories. Accusations are not going up willy nilly.
The woman who first spoke out about Dustin Hoffman wrote a piece for the LA Times about what it took to come forward and what it took for the story to be printed.
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/1197/article/p2p-95437094/
There are no Lynch mobs firing these individuals. In Lauer’s case it was NBC’s top 4 executives — all of whom are male so we can dispence with the claim it was some vindictive woman with an ax to grind. There was no pending litigation or criminal case so the only process due Lauer was abiding by his employment contract and company policy.
I am sure that the 4 individuals who run NBC and who are very likely extremely well versed on company policy and employment contracts were on solid ground when they let him go. To heap blame on any of the women who have come forward is pretty transparent. I’ll put my money on NBC’s decision making process over wild speculation made without all the information and evidence those 4 men had at their disposal.
When you have multiple reports of sex in the office during business hours - some consensual and some allegedly not - you know things are out of control. I was a fan of Lauer’s and I have zero issue with NBC’s decision. He was the common denominator in what appeared to be a pretty toxic work environment.
Chris Matthew’s of MSNBC was reprimanded in 1999 while at CNBC for inappropriate jokes and comments. I am not really sure he learned his lessons. I remember during the last election cycle him cracking something about Melania Trump.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/msnbc-s-chris-matthews-was-reprimanded-over-comments-about-woman-n830471
http://variety.com/2016/tv/news/chris-matthews-sexist-melanie-donald-trump-msnbc-1201766549/
I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if Chris Matthews were accused. Or Chuck Todd either, or Lawrence O’Donnell.
Let’s not get into who “looks like they could do it.” That way there be dragons.
Granted, it’s not the US, but this article from the Sunday Times in Britain echos pretty well how I feel about all this and clearly the world is watching how “we” as a society manage our way through this. While elevating the conversation about appropriate business decorum and in some respects “dating” decorum we have gone into the bog as far as understanding the subtle differences in what is harassment and what is not and clearly women are still all over the place as far as managing their personal lives but I suspect that won’t change and that’s OK, but sad to be the man who hits on a woman who just wants to be alone and sad be the woman who chases the bad boy and then gets hurt because all the regulations and rules in the world are not going too make relationships clean and easy.
Personally I have worked with, interacted with, been involved with socially and come in contact with probably thousands of men in the 40 some years that I’ve been an adult and luckily only once been inappropriately groped/touched in a public setting to which the guy got an elbow really hard in his gut and a couple times had to fend off (when I was young and single) with a stove, push and a very firm “no” an overly amorous guy. I’ve also done things that 35+ years down the line make me roll my eyeballs and wonder what I was thinking. That tells me there are thousands upon thousands upon thousands of decent guys, but we’ve come to a point where everything, simply everything is harassment. And frankly if you go along with something you’ve consented, full stop, you don’t have the right to redefine it days, months, years later to take out some guy in the media. Tell it to your therapist not the media. Guys aren’t mind readers thank goodness.
I can look back at actions I made years ago, and realize I was very wrong to say or do what I said or did, even though at the time I believed I was justified. Lots of us second-guess our parenting like this. Some of us might look back and realize we bullied or went along with bullying; some might realize we took advantage of vulnerable people; some might regret harsh words that caused a rupture.
I look back on things that I agreed to do, and realize that the guy was wrong to ask me to do them and I was wrong to do them.
I can learn. I can regret. I can admit I was wrong and should have been better. I can acknowledge that others involved in my actions were also wrong and should have done better.
I’m still not clear where consent and coercion cross in this argument. And sorry, but most of the things I’ve been hearing are obviously over-the-top egregious. They are not Harry pursuing a coquettish Sally. Really, I think most of us can tell the difference.
I’m not so sure about that. I think I agree with Fang. If someone does or asks something of you that feels out of your comfort zone AND you agree to do it that is not harassment or assault.
If it was out of bounds for the guy to ask, no reaction I had made it right for him to ask.
Suppose my boss tries to sleep with me. And suppose
(1) I agree because I’ve always had the hots for him, or
(2) I agree because I think he’ll fire me if I say no, or
(3) I agree because I think he’ll help my career if I say yes, or
(4) I say no, but don’t tell anyone because I believe that he is protected by his superiors and my telling will only hurt me, or
(5) I quit silently, or
(6) I get an NDA and quit
NONE of my reactions make it right for him to have asked to sleep with me. If I now, years later, tell the story, nothing I did makes what he did right. Back then, people wouldn’t have believed me if I exposed him, and I would have suffered. Now, in this moment, people will believe me, and he will get his rightful punishment.
Anyone who says that we should not now expose sex pests and sex monsters who preyed on us years ago is enabling those sex pests and sex monsters to evade their rightful consequences and keep preying on more victims. @momofthreeboys, I’m sure by criticizing every woman who dares to speak up to expose predators, you don’t intend to enable sex pests and sex monsters, but that is the effect of what you are doing.
There have been a couple of cases that have made me raise my eyebrows. Minnesota Public Radio may have had excellent reasons to fire Garrison Keillor, but unless any more information becomes public, I don’t think it is appropriate to drum him from the public square. Especially given the fraught politics of the situation, I’m not ready to label Jeffrey Tambor a monster based on two accusations from women likely to have known each other. And even in the case of men who clearly have acted inappropriately, the same response doesn’t seem warranted in all cases (I don’t think Al Franken necessarily should have had to resign, for instance).
But one thing that has shaken me is that most of these claims DO seem to be valid, and describe genuinely disgusting, reprehensible, behavior. I’d love to say that we’re in the midst of a national overreaction, because it would mean that there aren’t a sizable number of powerful men who routinely use their position to prey on women (and sometimes men). But that’s precisely what people like Weinstein, Spacey, Lauer, etc seem to have done – based on numerous accounts that paint a consistent portrait of appallingly bad behavior.
That’s why I’ve been rolling my eyes when I hear pundits say things like “Will men be unwilling to hire women out of fear of similar accusations?” Again, it is possible that one or two of these cases are really instances of women maliciously defaming innocent men. But really, most of the things these guys are accused of doing are no brainers. Don’t expose yourself to people who aren’t already romantic partners. Don’t con women into coming to your room so you can hit on her. Don’t threaten women’s careers or suggest they owe you sex. I’m not willing to say that there is no case in which an relationship with a power differential can be consensual, but for the love of reason don’t seek out random flings with your underlings, and in the rare cases that a relationship might be appropriate, proceed slowly and maybe start with coffee and not sexual innuendo.
If men use this as an excuse not to hire women, it won’t be the fault of women.
I disagree - any man can ask you to sleep with them and any woman can ask any man to sleep with them, the difference is saying yes or no UNLESS your workplace prohibits fraternizing with each other or your educational institution says no sex at all for anyone. I do not agree that any man, boss or not, that asks you to sleep with them is a “pest” that is going too far for me as I happen to like men and I might say yes or I might say no depending on office protocols and how I project the situation, but it’s my decision to own. Now if I say no and he keeps asking and asking and asking and not listening to my no…I’d say he’s pretty desperate and if it started impacting my work situation I’d report it to HR, but most men I’ve encountered don’t ask and ask and ask and ask,. I’ve never met a “sex monster” so can’t say what I would do if I worked with a groper or someone who physically assaults me or whatever qualifies as “sex monster” but I would not let it happen more than once without taking some action depending on what happened and why and where If someone male or female I worked with gave me a sex toy e I’d toss it back and say “That is in extremely poor taste and offensive” unless we were truly pals and raunchy sex conversations were normal for our relationship… but I’m a straight shooter and am not known for playing games so the chance of some guy or woman from work giving me sex toy is not in the cards and I don’t participate in raunchy sex repartee. Clearly not all women are comfortable with that strong of a position so we’ll have to wait and see what comes out of all this.
You might consent to your boss sleeping with you, and your boss might consent, but you forget all the people who didn’t consent to this relationship-- the women who turned him down and got bad work assignments or got fired, the women he didn’t sleep with who have to see him favoring you in work situations over them when they are more qualified, his next paramour who sees what she has to do at your workplace to get ahead. (Generic “you” here; I’m not accusing any poster of this.)
Momof3boys - No, it is not appropriate. It is never appropriate for a supervisor to ask a subordinate for sex. Never. Boss will have to tuck his/her libido away and wait until he/she is no longer supervising said subordinate. Just like a teacher/student relationship, a supervisor/subordinate relationship has levels of power too uneven to go there.
I think there are many cases in which it is inappropriate to ask another person for sex, even in the absence of a policy forbidding it, especially when there is a significant power differential.
I used to work for a quite prominent man in my field, someone with the potential to exert significant influence on my career. We had a friendly working relationship, and I still occasionally keep in touch with him now that I work elsewhere, but there was also nothing in our interaction to suggest or invite greater intimacy. Had he hit on me or asked if I wanted to sleep with him, it would have been grossly inappropriate - not potential rape, but still grossly inappropriate and potentially coercive. I also would have felt awful to have to recategorize a mentor figure who I believed had hired me because of respect for my work into someone who may have had different things in mind.
Again, I’m not saying that ALL boss-subordinate relationships are inherently predatory. There was another woman who had worked closely with this man for over a decade. While he was still her boss, her status was much higher than mine. They knew each other well, and their families sometimes socialized together outside of work. Had the two been unmarried, I wouldn’t consider it predatory if he respectfully asked her – in the context of an long-standing professional relationship and making it clear that there were no consequences for refusal – if she had any romantic interest in him. But that’s a very different case, and one that doesn’t seem to apply in any of the famous cases we’ve been hearing about.
I’ll add that this man often called me and other young woman “honey” and “sweetheart.” I never cared – he was a southerner in his mid- 60s, and I was younger than his daughters. What was important is that he always treated me with absolute respect. That would have all been jeopardized by a crude pass, let alone any more aggressive behavior.
I can imagine scenarios where one would say “yes” to something that would nonetheless be a class A felony, so I don’t put saying yes as the supreme criteria. I find the “blame the victim” philosophy rather disheartening, actually.
“I’ll add that this man often called me and other young woman “honey” and “sweetheart.” I never cared”
Same here. The firm chairman who called me those things put his clients’ businesses in my hands. He showed me respect where it mattered. It would have ruined my whole experience at that employer if he had hit on me. I could never have been comfortable there afterwards. I count myself very lucky that I never ended up in that situation.
Just because some of us have been fortunate enough to have not been personally sexually harassed or worse (or have only had minimal such experiences) does not in any way reduce the awfulness to those who HAVE been harassed. People do NOT dress or act to invite this—it is a problem with the sex pest. Blaming the victim only is a second attack on said victims.
Hmmm, companies have different things on their books regarding harassment,. If a supervisor makes sex a condition of employment that is clear as generally is unwelcome touching, lewd remarks and obvious things at most comoanies not necessarily covered under EEOC guidelines All other situations, best to check with HR to see if it’s covered. Although theoretically someone can talk to HR about anything and generally they will have some suggestions.
and finally from workplacewellness website:
[/quote]
Can one incident of harassment or offensive behavior constitute sexual harassment?
It depends. Quid pro quo cases may be considered sexual harassment when linked to the granting or denial of employment benefits. On the other hand, the conduct would have to be quite severe for a single incident or isolated incidents of offensive sexual conduct or remarks to rise to the level of a hostile environment. Hostile environment claims usually require proof of a pattern of offensive conduct. Nevertheless, a single and extremely severe incident of harassment may be sufficient to constitute a Title VII violation. A general rule of thumb is that the more severe the harassment is, the less likely it is that the victim will be required to show a repetitive series of incidents. This is especially true when the harassment is physical.
[/quote]
so no, again, not all things rise to the level of harassment and a single incident may not fall under company or EEOC guidelines so know your company’s handbook. Being “not appropriate” in and of itself may only be worthy of a little warning conversation at your company. If it’s pervasive and recurring after being told to stop by the offended or HR, then it may fall under your HR guidelines and/or EEOC and be grounds for termination. That’s why I think Matt Lauer must have done something inline with an EEOC offense with the Socchi woman and opened NBC up for a liability case. OR NBC was aware of what was going on with the adultery and pal gag gifts and was afraid of running afoul of a hostile environment claim .