Posted on 02/04/2018 5:40:16 AM PST by C19fan
Well Scrooge all of that. As for me I ain’t a perv or such and will remain my relaxed self around women. If a situation seemingly appears inappropriate I’m outta there but otherwise I’m not putting up an overly protective wall if not necessary. Scrooge Lieberalism and Feminism contortions of self moronic behaviors.
Why do the “challenges” women face ALWAYS require action by OTHERS to meet? The very history of women in in what were traditional male areas is all the proof anyone needs that they can’t just stfu and DO IT. They need judges, lawyers and cops, they need timeouts, lowered standards and special consideration all along the line. Who the hell can take them seriously anymore and WHY?
Let’s not confuse the issues.....some of the starlets are WILLINGto do whatever it takes.
These other cases came to light b/c they were NOT willing.....they said no......but Harvey forced himself on them.
Nearly all of them are willing to do it. Blowing the boss just isn’t a big deal to twenty something women in high powered industries like Hollywood and finance. We’re getting a lot of revisionist history and I just don’t believe all stories.
Turns out that the Bible was right too.
Judah conceded Tamar was more righteous than he was.
Well, I don’t know you position or affluence, but if you are a potential target by rank, resources or views, the first time you are set up, your views will change.
I work for a rather large company (25,000 employees in U.S. alone) and this supposed culture of men preying on women in the workplace just doesn't exist. Of course, I can't speak for the cesspool of Hollywood and Harvey Weinstein types. Nor can I speak for government and the Bill Clinton and Kennedy types.
In the world of business however, we are too busy trying to hit our sales number and deliver goods and services at decent margin to fool around like they do in Hollywood and Congress.
That said, in this silly "me too" climate that the feminists are pushing on us, I can see a more cautious approach being taken to women in the workplace. Maybe we don't hire so many of them going forward - too much risk. Maybe some of them get stuck on the career ladder because men can no longer meet with them one-on-one and so they get bypassed for special projects that might lead to promotional opportunities. Maybe women are no longer invited to after work events (drinks with the guys) because who knows, one of them might have a drink too many and say or do something that is misconstrued later. Too much risk!
Maybe Mike Pence does have it right. Maybe no man should be alone with any woman he is not married to. This is definitely going to have an impact on the opportunities that women have in the workplace. There is no doubt about it.
Again, I will point out that I never had a problem in my workplace working with women and I've been there over 30 years. Over the years, I've worked with some wonderful women and on numerous occasions I've had one-on-ones with them (with the door closed) and have had lunches or even business dinners with them. Never did anything untoward happen. But maybe I was just lucky and maybe I've been pushing my luck all these years.
At this stage in my career, I can't afford a career ending situation as I'm unlikely to find a comparable position at my age in the industry I'm in.
So maybe I take the Mike Pence approach for now on.
Sexually aggressive women hardly ever get brought to account.
#WouldntBoinkYouWithAStolen#
as Cat Woman (Julie Newmar) said;
Puurrrfect.
So maybe I take the Mike Pence approach for now on."
I think you might be on to something here.
Over a career, I've found that the phrase "Better safe than sorry", can have many applications.
“many male legislators will no longer meet with them privately,”
The Mike Pence solution.
Welcome to the new puritanism. Conservative Christians are getting the last laugh. What a delicious irony.
Making a fool of himself? How? Putting a lampshade on his head and dancing on a table? Clucking like a chicken?
Regards,
Not even considering the 'male' feminists, you would have to even pick the witnesses carefully or possibly end up with pyjama boy.
I wasn't aware that sexual harassment had been that much of an issue, 50 years ago in underground mines. Were "he-said-she-said" situations really that common back then, a mile below the surface?
Please do elucidate!
Regards,
Yes, absolutely.
Men should not be screwing around, either.
I wish all of them would be old-fashioned and stop having sex any old time they want. BC pills made sex a free-for-all, and what have we gotten for it? Lots of bastard people who continue the trend.
Frankly, prostitution are more respectable than the freebies rampant today. They demand something for sex. “Respectable” women (LOL) give it away free and often get stuck with the bill. Stupid, immoral.
No. I think the term is "Male Prostitute."
No, the term is "John" (i.e., "client of a sex worker").
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.