There always will be male decision makers in businesses.
Often, females are needed in businesses where sex appeal is required. The sex appeal gets customers, both male (for their libido) and female (who look for role models).
Entertainment roles, media roles, waitresses, barmaids, music venues, fashion retail, industrial sales etc.
So, most women do not want to use their body to access employment and rightly so.
However, some women are willing. Those women will have an advantage. The male decision maker can say that the “willing” female better fit the organization or some other intangible reason why she is there.
This is bad for the organization, causes jealousy and lawsuits from the “unwilling” women. See Fox News. These lawsuits are nothing more than embarrassment avoidance settlement payment machines.
The “unwilling” women were not necessarily harassed or molested. If they were, it’s criminal and they need to seek charges.
Harvey Weinstein is evil. But we need to separate the criminal behavior from the business decision maker behavior. Women need to blame other women for their influence on the decision makers.
I don’t see how returning “tainted” money helps. It mainly benefits Weinstein. Better to burn it than to give it back.
“But we need to separate the criminal behavior from the business decision maker behavior. Women need to blame other women for their influence on the decision makers.”
Balzy post, but SPOT ON!
Your post was insightful. Thank you for it.
‘Pod