Jump to content

Sexual Assault part 4 - "no, I don't want to see your weaner!"


zelticgar

Recommended Posts

More detail from Wes Goodman (married anti-LGBT politician caught with a male staffer in a ... compromising situation) -- turns out there is also a trail of sexual harrassment of young men seeking advice and access from a conservative politician.

http://www.theroot.com/anti-gay-politician-sexually-harassed-more-than-30-men-1820639036

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Not sure how you can carry it out this far. He's not saying he can't meet with women after hours, he's saying he wouldn't do it unless his wife was present. 

I don't much care to defend Mike Pence. I find his homophobia and fundamentalism to be extremely regressive in nature, but this particular peccadillo doesn't bother me that much.

Mrs. Pence has no business being at a work meeting for work she does not do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I often have lunch with male coworkers and colleagues because I work in a male-dominated sector. And amazingly lunch has never ended with tears or a trip to HR. I traveled to Asia with a Ops Director on a business trip this winter and nothing untowards happened the entire time. It's possible. 

Pence's position is awful because it suggests 1) the problem is womens are nasty and unwholesome except Mother and 2) some level of victimhood on his part if he didn't have this strict policy. 

God forbid he places value in women as people. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essentially Pence's policy is that women have no place in the workforce, and he will give them less attention and respect than is legally required by law.

If you think this is good policy, you also believe things like hijabs are good policy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Essentially Pence's policy is that women have no place in the workforce, and he will give them less attention and respect than is legally required by law.

If you think this is good policy, you also believe things like hijabs are good policy.

The law requires you to give attention to co-workers outside of work? Seems like a stretch to me.

I'm not suggesting it's a good policy. I think the examples that Mexal and kair provided are probably healthier.  

My pushback doesn't involve my perceived inability to control myself. It involves pissing off or upsetting my wife. So from that angle, I can relate in some small measure. The fact that he brags about it is weird.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

The law requires you to give attention to co-workers outside of work? Seems like a stretch to me.

It requires you to not discriminate. If you would do something for a male and not a female coworker as part of your work duties, that's discrimination. And yes, it does require you to give attention to co-workers outside of work; parties and the like can be areas for discrimination too. 

5 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I'm not suggesting it's a good policy. I think the examples that Mexal and kair provided are probably healthier.  

My pushback doesn't involve my perceived inability to control myself. It involves pissing off or upsetting my wife. So from that angle, I can relate in some small measure. The fact that he brags about it is weird.

Perhaps he shouldn't have taken a job that requires him to interact with roughly 50% of the human population, then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An anonymous survey of female Capitol Hill staffers conducted by National Journal in 2015 found that “several female aides reported that they have been barred from staffing their male bosses at evening events, driving alone with their congressman or senator, or even sitting down one-on-one in his office for fear that others would get the wrong impression.” One told the reporter Sarah Mimms that in 12 years working for her previous boss, he “never took a closed door meeting with me. ... This made sensitive and strategic discussions extremely difficult.”

Social-science research shows this practice extends beyond politics and into the business world, and it can hold women back from key advancement opportunities. A 2010 Harvard Business Review research report led by Sylvia Ann Hewlett, the president of the Center for Work-Life Policy think tank, found that many men avoid being sponsors—workplace advocates—for women “because sponsorship can be misconstrued as sexual interest.”

Hewlett’s surveys, interviews, and focus groups found that 64 percent of executive men are reluctant to have one-on-one meetings with junior women, and half of junior women avoid those meetings in turn. Perhaps as a result, 31 percent of women in her sample felt senior men weren’t willing to “spend their chips” on younger women in office political battles. What’s more, “30 percent of them noted that the sexual tension intrinsic to any one-on-one relationship with men made male sponsorship too difficult to be productive.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/pences-gender-segregated-dinners/521286/

not just mike pence

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cas Stark said:

An anonymous survey of female Capitol Hill staffers conducted by National Journal in 2015 found that “several female aides reported that they have been barred from staffing their male bosses at evening events, driving alone with their congressman or senator, or even sitting down one-on-one in his office for fear that others would get the wrong impression.” One told the reporter Sarah Mimms that in 12 years working for her previous boss, he “never took a closed door meeting with me. ... This made sensitive and strategic discussions extremely difficult.”

Social-science research shows this practice extends beyond politics and into the business world, and it can hold women back from key advancement opportunities. A 2010 Harvard Business Review research report led by Sylvia Ann Hewlett, the president of the Center for Work-Life Policy think tank, found that many men avoid being sponsors—workplace advocates—for women “because sponsorship can be misconstrued as sexual interest.”

Hewlett’s surveys, interviews, and focus groups found that 64 percent of executive men are reluctant to have one-on-one meetings with junior women, and half of junior women avoid those meetings in turn. Perhaps as a result, 31 percent of women in her sample felt senior men weren’t willing to “spend their chips” on younger women in office political battles. What’s more, “30 percent of them noted that the sexual tension intrinsic to any one-on-one relationship with men made male sponsorship too difficult to be productive.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/03/pences-gender-segregated-dinners/521286/

not just mike pence

 

I suspected this would actually be the case...and then people wonder why women disproportionately don't have more jobs higher up in companies hence the wage gap. Like...so many women just aren't getting the opportunities for progression if a large precentage of men won't be alone with them...idiotic. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Theda Baratheon said:

I suspected this would actually be the case...and then people wonder why women disproportionately don't have more jobs higher up in companies hence the wage gap. Like...so many women just aren't getting the opportunities for progression if a large precentage of men won't be alone with them...idiotic. 

Well, it's also the case that women won't be with men, for good reason. They'll be thought that they slept with their boss to get a promotion, or they'll actually be assaulted, or they don't want to give the impression that they're interested, or...

Basically they're just kind of hosed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I'd be a lot more concerned about an accused kiddie diddler being elected to the senate despite multiple accusations of molestation and harassment. Now that's something worthy of feeling ill over. Women expressing their support of a longtime friend however is hardly pro harassment.

Surprisingly, one can feel ill over multiple things.  

And yes, a halt to this current movement is something to be ill over.  Again, if you don't want the movement to continue, you are pro harassment.  Of course this isn't surprising coming from you considering all of the victim shaming you've done over the threads.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dr. Pepper said:

Surprisingly, one can feel ill over multiple things.  

And yes, a halt to this current movement is something to be ill over.  Again, if you don't want the movement to continue, you are pro harassment.  Of course this isn't surprising coming from you considering all of the victim shaming you've done over the threads.  

I'd thank you not to put words in my mouth, but that would be a waste of time and breath, as you do it continuously.

Finding you to be hyperbolic and not wanting this movement to continue are in no way related. But conflate away, as you are wont to do.

Perhaps you might try a digestive of one sort or another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

I'd thank you not to put words in my mouth, but that would be a waste of time and breath, as you do it continuously.

Finding you to be hyperbolic and not wanting this movement to continue are in no way related. But conflate away, as you are wont to do.

Perhaps you might try a digestive of one sort or another.

What words?  Do you not remember victim shaming?  Do you not recall asking how women could let someone grope them?  Are you not victim shaming in this very thread by claiming to understand why Mike Pence (and yourself apparently) would discriminate against women and refuse to meet with them privately as part of their work?  These are your words.  Are you changing your mind about them now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

What words?  Do you not remember victim shaming?  Do you not recall asking how women could let someone grope them?  Are you not victim shaming in this very thread by claiming to understand why Mike Pence (and yourself apparently) would discriminate against women and refuse to meet with them privately as part of their work?  These are your words.  Are you changing your mind about them now?

Yeah, I stepped back from my initial statement regarding Franken's second accuser on the back of kairparavel's well thought argument in the last thread, which in turn prompted you to insult me. My inability to comprehend it doesn't make it not so. 

The Pence thing is overblown methinks, so I stand by that. I can see how it's problematic if he's not treating men in the same way. I get Kal's point, but I'm not sure it trumps his concerns regarding his marriage to be honest.

 

/Oh hey, and just for clarification's sake, you had absolutely nothing to do with that shift in opinion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

Yeah, I stepped back from my initial statement regarding Franken's second accuser on the back of kairparavel's well thought argument in the last thread, which in turn prompted you to insult me. My inability to comprehend it doesn't make it not so. 

The Pence thing is overblown methinks, so I stand by that. I can see how it's problematic if he's not treating men in the same way. I get Kal's point, but I'm not sure it trumps his concerns regarding his marriage to be honest.

 

/Oh hey, and just for clarification's sake, you had absolutely nothing to do with that shift in opinion.

 

Manhole: Insults and shames every victim.

Also Manhole: Waaaahhhh, why did you insult me for that!?!?!

More of Manhole: Men do not need to treat women with respect if their wives tell them it's ok not to.

Manhole Again: Are you insulting me for that?  Makes no sense.  

 

Just summarizing all of this for those who are still confused about how rape and harassment culture work and why it continues to be so prevalent with victims reluctant to come forward.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Trump Sexual Assault Claims Need to be Investigated

 https://www.salon.com/2017/11/21/its-time-to-investigate-the-sexual-assault-charges-against-donald-trump/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

 

/Let's keep the ball rolling. If Franken is deserving of an investigation, surely Trump is as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 Trump Sexual Assault Claims Need to be Investigated

 https://www.salon.com/2017/11/21/its-time-to-investigate-the-sexual-assault-charges-against-donald-trump/?utm_source=fark&utm_medium=website&utm_content=link&ICID=ref_fark

 

/Let's keep the ball rolling. If Franken is deserving of an investigation, surely Trump is as well.

Absolutely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dr. Pepper said:

How is it not? When they say this accused grope isn't the man they know, the implication is the accusers must be lYing or must have motive or whatever.  Dozens are doing this same thing with Moore. People do it for the accused all the time and the veracity of these public defenses have the power of preventing others from coming forward, as has often been the case. 

A movement where sexual harassment being acknowledged like never before potentially coming to an end making me ill is hyperbolic only if you're pro harassment.

I'm with ya. Have a sprite and some pepto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Republican ratfucking of Al Franken continues, as an 'anonymous person' claims Franken totally groped Arianna Huffington during a photoshoot (photo's included) and that Huffington was disgusted by his creepy behavior!

Franken gropes Huffington

Seems they got a bit too sloppy with this story though, apparently not even bothering contacting Huffington herself before publishing, as hours later Huffington herself debunks the 'anonymous person', claiming that 'the notion that there was anything inappropriate in this photo shoot is truly absurd'.

Guess the Republicans reaaaaallly want Franken gone, but this is just third rate work guys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...