Posted on 10/18/2004 6:43:11 PM PDT by wagglebee
In a culture that sexualizes women constantly, the line between water-cooler chat and harassment is increasingly thin.
Bill O'Reilly, the conservative talk-show host whose "The O'Reilly Factor" is the highest-rated cable news show, has been sued for sexual harassment by his former producer Andrea Mackris. Mackris alleges that on many occasions, both in person and over the phone, O'Reilly engaged in lewd and lascivious conversation against her will. She goes so far as to state that O'Reilly unlawfully engaged in, and gratified himself with, phone sex, with Mackris on the other end of the line.
To be sure, O'Reilly enjoys the presumption of innocence in the suit, until proven otherwise. I personally respect and greatly enjoy O'Reilly as a broadcaster and I am sorry to see his public standing undermined by these allegations. While some of the content of Mackris' affidavit seems possible, readers of it will discover that other parts seem directed squarely at Roger Ailes, the chairman of the Fox News Channel, thereby undermining her credibility. Furthermore, Mackris does not explain why she didn't just hang up when O'Reilly allegedly harassed her repeatedly over the telephone.
Be that as it may, this sordid and sorry tale brings to the fore all that is wrong with our increasingly perverse culture. The question that the growing phenomenon of sexual harassment in the workplace raises is this: Can we really expect to have a healthy office environment, where men treat women as colleagues and intellectual equals, when everywhere else in the culture women are being so completely sexualized?
Is it realistic to ask men to separate what they see on television and in magazines from their interactions with women in the boardroom? With men being deluged in virtually every electronic medium with the message that women want to be recognized for their bodies rather than their brains, is it reasonable to expect that men will suddenly think differently the moment a woman dons a business suit?
Never in history have women been so sexually exploited as they are today.
College girls expose their breasts in exchange for a T-shirt on the "Girls Gone Wild" videos. MTV has transformed the women's music industry away from an emphasis on vocals and toward an emphasis of cleavage. Posters of Victoria's Secret models, dressed in thongs and the most revealing lingerie, line our mains thoroughfares, billboards and buses. Are men really expected to shut all this off the moment they stand in front of a copy machine?
Can we really expect a pure office environment to emerge from a degenerate culture? Indeed, in an environment where everything from the Internet to sporting events is sexualized, it even becomes difficult to determine what exactly constitutes harassment in the work place.
Let's see. If a man watches "Sex and the City" and, knowing that his female colleagues love the show, mentions at the water cooler how much he enjoyed the previous night's episode of Samantha giving a stranger oral sex, is it harassment? Or is it small talk?
And let's say a boss comes into the office after watching the Super Bowl and asks his secretary if she saw Janet Jackson's breast pop out during the half-time show, is he making lewd and inappropriate comments? What if a guy sees some new movie about sex and comments on the nude love scene – is that harassment? And if it is, can we at least recognize that we have made a huge portion of American culture off-limits in the workplace, because of how perversely sexualized it has become?
So that I am not misunderstood, let me make it clear that my purpose here is not to let men's boorish, and possibly illegal behavior, off the hook.
On the contrary. I wish that all men were gentlemen, behaving in a dignified and refined manner, especially around ladies. And I also wish that it didn't take the threat of legal action to get them to behave as gentlemen. Lewd comments on the part of lecherous men is the last thing that women should have to tolerate.
But let's acknowledge the incredibly mixed, contradictory and unfair signals that are being given to men. In life outside the office, men's lechery is encouraged in order to persuade men them to watch television or part with their cash. Near-naked twins sell them beer, women in thongs advertise the Miss America pageant, and Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera simulate masturbation in coming attractions for their shows on HBO and Showtime.
After being fed the idea in every corner of the culture that women primarily desire sexual attention, these men are expected to believe that women are going to be insulted, rather than complimented, by uncouth comments about their bodies.
What complicates the question of harassment is the fact that women are being subtly conditioned to use their sexuality to get ahead in the office. No less a branding genius than Donald Trump advised women on "The Apprentice" to play up their sexuality in commercial settings in order to gain power over men. Many women fall for this degrading advice by coming to the office dressed like streetwalkers. Dress codes today are considered outmoded and draconian, and fashion dictates that many women wear blouses cut very low and skirts cut very high. Yet men are expected not to notice. A woman's breasts can be spilling out of her blouse at a board-meeting, and men are expected to see her intelligence.
On my radio show, one man called in to say that there is a woman who works right across from his cubicle who wears see-through blouses nearly every day. "She's essentially wearing only a bra in the office, and I often have to put my hand in front of my face to block her out to stop myself from staring."
I am not blaming the victims or insinuating that women are inviting harassment. Far from it. No matter what they are exposed to and no matter how women dress, men must be in control of themselves and treat women as dignified and intellectual equals. I have never, and will never, excuse boorish behavior. But that does not change the fact that sexual harassment in the workplace is being vastly increased by a culture that both fosters the idea that women are primarily sexual objects, and that puts no emphasis on men and women dressing modestly and professionally.
And you can be sure that until such time that the sexual exploitation of women is reversed – and women reclaim their dignity by refusing to be portrayed on television and the Internet as the lecherous man's playthings – the number of women who have to suffer through male crudity is only going to increase.
True..
What did people do before they were chatting away on line...
Survey of Freeper Hermits/
Good Survey!
I know what I was doing before FReeperdom engulfed my being, but I can't discuss it in public out of fear that it would incinerate me...
I am sure your not the only one...:)
No doubt. I think men are fairly boorish now in mixed company. There just isn't a stigma attached to acting like a jerk as there was even 25 years ago.
Traditionally women have had a 'domesticating' effect on males. I always figured that was a good thing.
I do think that our culture, on balance, is just too sensitive - on one hand both men and women have more education, make more money, and have more options than ever before.
At the same time, they seem to be hopelessly sensitive. An off the cuff remark can be deemed 'offensive' and these strong, educated winners wilt and cry out. It's insane, really.
In an episode of 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' Larry David off-handedly refers to someone as a 'mulatto.' The small party he was at was evidently appalled, and his wife insisted that the word now was 'biracial.' Larry didn't know and he certainly didn't mean to hurt anyone, yet it didn't stop his circle of friends from being 'hurt' by the (clearly innocent) use of the word.
Between 1970 and 1990, I think, a whole generation has seems to buy into the mindset that they are entitled to go through life without being 'offended.' Truth is, this is really a kind of 'mock offended' - nobody's feelings are really hurt by casual use of a word like 'mulatto,' 'blind,' or 'crippled.' Yet, the self appointed guardians of people's feelings have no harm coming down on others (and ostensibly hurt their feelings) in the name of a one-sided standard they set for decency.
I consider myself lucky - nobody during my life has ever felt bad about offending me, so I learned to take it. :-)
Hey, thanks! The men and women of america does seem to need all the help they can get, huh? Maybe it's my calling! Haha! Keep the faith!
Kudos to you!
That's pretty cool! or should I say hot!
It used to take a hell of a lot of beer.
Apparently I was born 20 yrs too early
I agree 100% that there is no longer a stigma against men behaving rudely among mixed company. I really think that stigma should come back, actually. You are right - men should behave better and situations like this wouldn't come up.
That being said, I don't buy into the exaggerated sensitivity on the part of the women, either. It's simply silly that a remark that could be considered suggestive might excite a woman at an office if it comes from a hunky UPS guy, but seriously 'offends' if it comes from Moe in accounting.
That she may find one welcome and titillating, and one somehow 'offensive' and legally actionable, despite being the same remark, is simply silly to me.
Both sexes need to grow up a bit on matters like this.
Women use to do only things like that when they were drunk 20 yrs ago now a days thery do it Sober....
man, i got out my old x-ray vision glasses and checked her out--she's pretty hot.
(anyone out there want to buy some x-ray vision glasses?)
Damn,Its tough to get old. ;-)
I am self-taught.
You're not a pervert, because I'm one, and you're never at the meetings.
Oh dear, poor Winona will never live that down!
You know, there was a story in the tabloids that Winona had been nabbed for shoplifting while a teen. The cop escorted Winona home, to report her to her parents. When mom opened the door and heard what happened, she went ballistic on the cop for arresting her poor daughter.
Fifty years ago, if a man made a vulgar remark to a woman, whe was a boorish cad showing disrespect. Now he's a sexist pig guilty of sexual harassment. Same misbehavior, but the source of indignation is different: vulgarity is acceptable, but "sexism" isn't.
Many modern day people mock our Victorian ancestors for their "prudery" or even our parents for their "1950s repression," but our society is every bit as prudish, repressed and judgmental as anyone in the 1850s or 1950s: we're just prudish, repressed and judgmental about different things.
That being said, I don't buy into the exaggerated sensitivity on the part of the women, either. It's simply silly that a remark that could be considered suggestive might excite a woman at an office if it comes from a hunky UPS guy, but seriously 'offends' if it comes from Moe in accounting.
LOL! Cute guys can get away with more!
If he has the influence or power to affect her career, and if he is talking about, for example, Sex and the City, in order to soften her up, and gradually erode her defenses; and she's afraid that he'll be spiteful if she resists or reproves him...then it's intimidation and harassment.
my non-professional reaction to the o'reilly case is that he is such a narcissistic ego-maniac that i think he could easily sexually harass a woman on the phone and think that she was enjoying it.
what is the name of his show? it is a "news" show, but he names it after himself.
i doubt if narcissists of his level can really even comprehend that someone might not think he is wonderful.
i hope she wins.
You know things are bad when even middle-aged liberals complain about how badly behaved so many young people are today.
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.