November 28, 2017

"Don’t get in the elevator with him, you know, and the whole every female in the press corps knew that, right, don’t get in elevator with him."

"Now people are saying it out loud. And I think that does make a difference."

Said newswoman Cokie Roberts, speaking about John Conyers. The question, of course, is why didn't she or any of the other women in the press corps say it out loud? And what are you still not saying out loud? Are you just waiting until somebody else exposes one of the politicians you have been protecting or is there no one else you're just hanging back not talking about until the day comes when you'll be saying, once again, oh, yeah, we all knew that?

207 comments:

1 – 200 of 207   Newer›   Newest»
Fabi said...

Why didn't she say anything? It's a mystery!

/s

rhhardin said...

It's not said out loud because the actual human rule is work these things out one on one.

It's mob hysteria that's saying that every human interaction should be done in public, as if every interaction is a public problem.

That costs standard of living as people can no longer tune interactions to their mutual preferences.

The actual public problems are crimes; the rest are to be worked out one on one.

james james said...

The only safe male in Washington to get in an elevator with is Pence, and he won't get into the elevator with you if you are alone.

-jj

Larry J said...

CNN admitted to lying in their coverage of Iraq during the Saddam years to preserve access. Same thing here. Telling the truth about a powerful member of Congress would severely limit their access and likely hurt their careers.

james james said...

#takethestairs

-jj

George M. Spencer said...

Great graph from her Wiki page...

Writing in Slate.com, the right-leaning libertarian[25] media commentator Jack Shafer characterized Roberts' weekly segments for NPR's Morning Edition as "vacuous" and "four minutes of on-air blather" that relied heavily on her use of the word "interesting". Shafer also wrote, "Her segments, though billed as 'analysis' by NPR, do little but speed-graze the headlines and add a few grace notes. If you're vaguely conversant with current events, you're already cruising at Roberts' velocity. Roberts doesn't just voice the conventional wisdom; she is the conventional wisdom."[26]

And the page also contains a link to a Slatestory from 2000 in which about 30 staffers told who they voted for for president and why. About 25 voted for Gore, two for Bush. Interestingly, most of the Gore voters expressed loathing for him

Ann Althouse said...

"It's not said out loud because the actual human rule is work these things out one on one."

Is there any evidence than any of the women of the press corps worked out this "thing" with John Conyers one on one?

I think you mean that "the actual human rule" is to let men like this get away with doing the same thing over and over and over again and never having to experience any consequence at all. Or: the working out of it is, for the woman, withdrawing, keeping to herself, and not causing trouble. Being nice and not hurting anyone — it's the arrangement so far and it's been working out quite well for the men.

The Vault Dweller said...

Part of this is how journalism is structured now. Everything is access journalism. Journalists depend on, if not friendly relations, at least positive relations with people in order to get access to stories. Especially when it comes to politics in DC. If stories about Conyers came out from the press, those members of the press would certainly suffer in loss of access to Conyers, but also lots of establishment Democrats who would now view those press members as non-friendly. There are always new journalists coming up too looking to strike a name for themselves, politicians can always find a new journalist to strike up a friendly relationship with. Journalists are fungible to a degree, just like how young actors and actresses are fungible.

Michael The Magnificent said...

If John Conyers were a Republican, Cokie and her fellow females in the press corps would have wired themselves up with spy cameras and intentionally rode the elevators with Conyers day after day, capturing every lurid moment until they had enough to run an hour long expose on Nightline.

But he isn't, so they left this predator to prey on other unsuspecting females instead.

tola'at sfarim said...

Democracy dies in darkness. The wapo managed to find out Roy Moore's proclivities, but the open secrets on it's beat........crickets.

Matthew Sablan said...

Man. I live near DC and I don't know any of these open secrets.

Ann Althouse said...

"The actual public problems are crimes; the rest are to be worked out one on one."

No middle ground between criminal prosecution and one-on-one working out of the problem?

Absurd! Just to name a few of the things you're forgetting: tort law, social shunning, demotion at work, getting fired, losing elections, criticism in the public press.

David Baker said...

1. You're not an "insider" if you blabber to the outside world.

2. It's a peccadillo, no big deal, so you take the next elevator.

(and some days you use the stairs)

rhhardin said...

Men get away with the same thing over and over because the're men and you're women. Take it as interesting rather than infuriating.

Take the infuriation private, instead of entertaining yourself with it.

Stick to crimes in public.

Shunning etc is going public.

It's absurd because it's sex. You can't fix that.

Ann Althouse said...

"Part of this is how journalism is structured now. Everything is access journalism. Journalists depend on, if not friendly relations, at least positive relations with people in order to get access to stories...."

But only male journalists could get the access of riding in the elevator alongside Conyers.

Notice how much gender inequity there is in journalism when female journalists have to avoid being alone with a particular politician. And yet all these female journalists kept a sisterhood of silence, in which they were all held back, while their male counterparts surged forward.

If you were a young woman deciding whether to enter journalism as a career and you knew this is how it works and how it will continue to work, you'd choose a different field (unless you were going to make a career out of breaking the silence).

rhhardin said...

Going out for a few hours. Also what's with the constant conflicting edits. Maybe they'll be gone later.

Michael The Magnificent said...

Being nice and not hurting anyone — it's the arrangement so far and it's been working out quite well for the men.

For the men who like to play grab-ass, sure. For, what I am hoping is the vast majority of us, who don't approve of and have discouraged this behavior we're passing the popcorn and watching the long overdue comeuppance.

Ann Althouse said...

"Also what's with the constant conflicting edits."

Not sure what that refers to, but from my end, I am having difficulty this morning getting the software to accept things I'm trying to post. If they're all going up and you are seeing them, that's weird, because I'm not.

Hagar said...

I think I notice a whole new crop of young females, heavily made up, hair-styled, and scantily dressed on network TV evening news.

Matthew Sablan said...

Well. Now every woman who quoted Conyers is going to be asked if she rode the elevator. I'm not sure if that's fair.

Hagar said...

"Also what's with the constant conflicting edits."

Althouse is getting a lot of instant responses simultaneously this morning.

Ann Althouse said...

"For the men who like to play grab-ass, sure. For, what I am hoping is the vast majority of us, who don't approve of and have discouraged this behavior we're passing the popcorn and watching the long overdue comeuppance."

"passing the popcorn and watching" is too passive. The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due. Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now? Don't be smug and don't be sadistic. There is a lot of potential right now to make life better for people. Don't be self-satisfied at sitting on the sidelines spectating.

The Vault Dweller said...

"But only male journalists could get the access of riding in the elevator alongside Conyers."

Well the women could get in the elevator with Mr. Conyers, they just risked more than their male counterparts. Either way, I am not certain getting in the elevator with Mr. Conyers was the access journalists hope for. I suspect access looks closer to politicians and their staffs have an idea of which journalists are friendly to them, so when those politicians want to get a story out, either about them, a colleague or an enemy, they will contact a friendly reporter. Not talking publicly about the elevator rides isn't what got journalists put on the friendly list, but it could jeopardize their being there or their organization being there. My guess to many of these reporters who didn't talk about it publicly, they only saw talking about it as all potential negative, no positive.

MikeR said...

"It's not said out loud because the actual human rule is work these things out one on one." Ann answered this very effectively, but - No. Real businesses have rules about this stuff, and normal people don't dare violate them because they will lose their jobs or worse. We are currently cracking down on certain particular glamorous businesses where the successful people think they are above the rules. In future they won't be, if we do this right. Getting rid of ones like Conyers helps. Calling for more people to name names will help more.

Fernandistien said...

"why didn't she or any of the other women in the press corps say it out loud?"

The Patriarchy™ silenced their voices.

Ipso Fatso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Ipso Fatso said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MikeR said...

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now? Don't be smug and don't be sadistic." Wow, Ann, you're in rare form this morning. No one is safe! (Even those of us who thought we were the good guys this time.:)

John Lynch said...

Here's a thought I just had:

This is the class of women, we're told, who would put an end to sexual harassment if they were put in charge. You know, the ones that saw it and did nothing.

I'm much more interested in doing something about harassment of low-status women. Ultimately, the women in the article have options. Going after powerful men feels good, but if it doesn't result in better enforcement or cultural change at the bottom it won't have any lasting impact.

AllenS said...

These cracker-ass women were afraid of Conyers calling them racist.

exhelodrvr1 said...

"There is a lot of potential right now to make life better for people."

Yes - and the great majority of that potential lies in uncovering the hypocrisy/lies/double-standards/willingness-to-sacrifice-anything-and-anyone-for-power lifestyle of most of the media, academia, and the political left.

That is why it is totally appropriate to sit back and watch.

John Lynch said...

I suspect most of the people with integrity left. Makes you wonder about politics and media.

Fernandistien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Fernandistien said...

Fauxcahontas made a promise or a threat: "Trump Will Not Silence Me by Using a 'Racial Slur' Like 'Pocahontas'"

Big Mike said...

"passing the popcorn and watching" is too passive. The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due. Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now? Don't be smug and don't be sadistic. There is a lot of potential right now to make life better for people. Don't be self-satisfied at sitting on the sidelines spectating.

Bullshit. There is no upside for a man to get involved in that situation. I know because I’ve been there, done that, and not enjoyed the consequences. You women made the rules (and staff the effing HR departments). Fix the effing rules or do it all yourselves.

MayBee said...

The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due. Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?

Why do you assume he (and other good men) knew about this or things like this?
Did the women tell them? The women told other women, we know that!
Why didn't the women do more to champion their own equality. WHat's with all this waiting on men to figure out what other men are doing to women?

Big Mike said...

Judging from what happened to Bob Packwood two decades ago, protection went only to Democrats.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?

What exactly are we supposed to do?

I have been in the work place since I was a teenager and if somebody was harassing women and demanding sex for favors I was never made aware of or saw it. My experience is more along the lines of seeing a man who connected to the corporate network from home and then, for some reason, looked at porn online, get fired and escorted from the building when he showed up for work the next day.

Most companies have strict rules about how to treat women and strongly enforce them because they fear getting sued over fostering a hostile work environment. They have hotlines you can call if you see something untoward and training on what is appropriate behavior. They monitor your Internet usage at work. They teach you not to identify what company you work for when using social media for fear that you might say something controversial. My experience has been that modern corporations do everything possible to eliminate any whiff of sexual harassment or any sort of discrimination whatsoever. The fact that movie moguls and politicians were able to get away with such behavior isn't on me. Its on the press who refused to report it and their colleagues who ignored it. They are the ones who need to be held accountable.

Mattman26 said...

I wonder if the Coke-meister realized what a bomb she was dropping there, not just on Conyers but on herself and the rest of the press corps.

Cokie's been a very high-status member of the Washington press corps for about as long as I can remember (which is a fairly long time). Unlike congressional staffers or others who might justifiably fear committing career suicide by speaking out, I'm pretty sure Cokie has had the stature for decades to report something like this without fear of personal consequences.

Didn't she know that democracy dies in darkness?

RAS743 said...

Daughter of two Democrat House representatives (now deceased), sister of one of one of the wealthiest lobbyists (now deceased) in Washington. Swamp creature, protecting another swamp creature, until others spoke up, and now it’s convenient for her to associate herself with the new narrative and join the herd condemning what once she had not the courage to divulge, let alone condemn. I would be interested in learning what she reported on Republicans committing the same offenses — Bob Packwood, for example.

EDH said...

"Going... down?"

Love in an elevator
Livin' it up when I'm goin' down
Love in an elevator
Lovin' it up till I hit the ground

Gonna be a penthouse pauper
Gonna be a millionaire
I'm gonna be a real fast talker
And have me a love affair
Gotta get my timin' right
It's a test that I gotta pass
I'll chase you all the way to stairway, honey
Kiss your sassafras

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sebastian said...

"why didn't she or any of the other women in the press corps say it out loud?" What Fabi said -- way up top. Prog mysteries are so mysterious.

"And what are you still not saying out loud?" That they are tools, always have been, always will be.

"Don't be self-satisfied at sitting on the sidelines spectating." Ah, yes, men to the rescue!

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Also, Cokie Roberts has her job because both her parents were congress critters. She is the epitome of a DC insider. Trusting her to report news in an impartial manner is utterly naive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cokie_Roberts

Rob McLean said...

Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace

It's tough to hold back the ocean with a broom, especially when doing so can get you fired.

MadisonMan said...

Exactly what Sebastian said: What are they still not talking about when it comes to Congress?

Why did Powerful Democrats get a free pass from the press? Well, we all know the answer to that.

You can't be boasting to the people in the bar that you're in the DC Press Corps if you actually report news that gets people mad at you and gets you expelled from the Cool Kids' Table.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Harassment is a form of employment discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA).

Harassment is unwelcome conduct that is based on race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. Harassment becomes unlawful where 1) enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment, or 2) the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive. Anti-discrimination laws also prohibit harassment against individuals in retaliation for filing a discrimination charge, testifying, or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or lawsuit under these laws; or opposing employment practices that they reasonably believe discriminate against individuals, in violation of these laws.

Petty slights, annoyances, and isolated incidents (unless extremely serious) will not rise to the level of illegality. To be unlawful, the conduct must create a work environment that would be intimidating, hostile, or offensive to reasonable people.

Offensive conduct may include, but is not limited to, offensive jokes, slurs, epithets or name calling, physical assaults or threats, intimidation, ridicule or mockery, insults or put-downs, offensive objects or pictures, and interference with work performance. Harassment can occur in a variety of circumstances, including, but not limited to, the following:

The harasser can be the victim's supervisor, a supervisor in another area, an agent of the employer, a co-worker, or a non-employee.
The victim does not have to be the person harassed, but can be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.
Unlawful harassment may occur without economic injury to, or discharge of, the victim.
The employer is automatically liable for harassment by a supervisor that results in a negative employment action such as termination, failure to promote or hire, and loss of wages. If the supervisor's harassment results in a hostile work environment, the employer can avoid liability only if it can prove that: 1) it reasonably tried to prevent and promptly correct the harassing behavior; and 2) the employee unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by the employer.

The employer will be liable for harassment by non-supervisory employees or non-employees over whom it has control (e.g., independent contractors or customers on the premises), if it knew, or should have known about the harassment and failed to take prompt and appropriate corrective action.

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/harassment.cfm

dda6ga dda6ga said...

Ms Robert is shocked? No, her bloodline runs directly back to the hard drinking, hard partying, hard stealing with both hands Huey Long machine in Louisiana. Just another Demo hypocrite on TV...But she has made a very long (pun intended) and well paying career or spouting platitudes and covering up for Demos...

Mac McConnell said...

In most all organizations everyone knows who not to get on an elevator with. This is true for State Houses, universities and corporations. The media always covers for liberals. They knew FDR was humping his nurse among others. They knew all about JFK's sexual deviant behavior and his drug problems. They knew the same about Bill Clinton while he was still Governor of Arkansas.

Fernandistien said...

"The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due."

If the "others" work at or with NPR, it's the correct response.

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?"

I agree! There should be a federal agency to help women who own businesses like the one for that helps men, er, it's website is around here somewhere.

Microsoft, Amazon, Apple/Mac, Disneyland and General Motors wouldn't exist if not for the federal "set-asides" for Men-Owned Businesses. Women deserve the same! Equality!

And there should be a Federal "Women's Bureau" like the Federal Men's Bureau, which has a big website somewhere, I bet.

"Don't be smug and don't be sadistic."

Come on, entire planet, "lean in" and help the oppressed upper- and upper-middle-class women of American Mass Media.

Mac McConnell said...

Congressman Luis Gutierrez D Chicago announced he will not run for re-election, I wonder who he was fucking.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

So the reality is that for most people the full weight of the federal government is used to ensure that businesses prevent harassment and discrimination by their employees and that failure to do so can carry a heavy monetary penalty. And the vast majority of businesses respond to that pressure by doing their best to prevent harassment and discrimination. However, it would appear that some politicians and entertainment big wigs got a pass on that, but the rest of us, who neither knew of or could have stopped the behavior should ponder our culpability.

Correct?

Sally327 said...

Don't Get On The Elevator. It could be the title of a horror movie.

Unless these elevators are really slow how much could one old man really accomplish? Which means, I guess, that Cokie didn't want to get on with him not because she couldn't handle whatever pawing he might try to do but because she didn't want to have to push back, because power, influence. She gets no credit for admitting it now that he may be losing that power and influence.

Fernandistien said...

it's website Sigh.

Ralph L said...

Send more women like Candy Crowley to report on Congress.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"Promising Practices for Preventing Harassment
As many employers recognize, adopting proactive measures may prevent harassment from occurring. Employers implement a wide variety of creative and innovative approaches to prevent and correct harassment.[1]

The Report of the Co-Chairs of EEOC's Select Task Force on the Study of Harassment in the Workplace ("Report") identified five core principles that have generally proven effective in preventing and addressing harassment:

Committed and engaged leadership;
Consistent and demonstrated accountability;
Strong and comprehensive harassment policies;
Trusted and accessible complaint procedures; and
Regular, interactive training tailored to the audience and the organization.[2]"

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/publications/promising-practices.cfm

Seems to me the problem is with the leadership and the absence of accountability and trusted complaint procedures (the press not doing there so-called job.) The long and short of it is that much of the government and entertainment business is a snake pit.

Never forget, reporters are stupid rich kids who couldn't get into law school.

Ralph L said...

She started to say the whole press corps and changed to every female. So they didn't tell the men?

brylun said...

The leftist Dem monolith groupthink at work again: Woman Withdraws Assault Claim Against Rep. Green.

Dems are members of groups first, and they must protect their coalition of groups at all cost. The individual is sacrificed at the altar of the Groupthink. The driveby media and the Dem judges are all part and parcel of this Groupthink.

Sebastian said...

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace." I've done my part, urging women to take the stairs since forever.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Men get away with the same thing over and over because they're men and you're women. Take it as interesting rather than infuriating.

It is actually a power issue and not so much JUST men and women. Top dogs. Alpha Chimps. From time immemorial this is the dynamic.

Powerful people know they can get away with abusing less powerful people. Some powerful people don't give into the vice of power, but many more do.

They can get away with it because the less powerful wish to be powerful themselves and feel that by 'giving in' or just abiding the abuse they can advance themselves. Self serving attitude of To Hell with anyone else as long as it doesn't hurt me and I get what I want.

Or, some of the less powerful are in a position where they desperately need the job, the position and out of fear go along or just quietly move elsewhere. They may also leave because they have some morals. Often they will try to say something, but knowing that they will be crushed most just get out to survive.

Men are abusers and women are abusers. Men are MORE often the power and have been known to abuse women as well as abuse men under their control. Kevin Spacey?

Cokie Roberts is slime because SHE had the power to be able to expose the abuse and chose to take the self serving to Hell with everyone else attitude.

NOW, however, there is something in it for HER so she can jump on the #METOO! train and try to appear virtuous.

Too late bitch. We know who and what you are.

Unknown said...

"These cracker-ass women were afraid of Conyers calling them racist."

Yep. You would have to be naive beyond telling to not recognize how the rules of political correctness looped back and constrained these women. Cowardice has a price and they were happy to pay it. So boo-frickety-hoo.

james james said...

I would not inappropriately touch a woman in an elevator.

But if she is good-looking I would probably look at her ass if she was ahead of me going up the stairs.

-jj

Biotrekker said...

I have always despised Cokie Roberts' smug and vapid demeanor and "analysis". But, she's worse than I thought.

William said...

You know what's worse than appearing before your staff in your underwear in order to sexually harass them? What's worse is dressing in your underwear because you forgot to put on your pants. Staff members say that Conyers has to be reminded to wear clothes. Conyers is said to be beyond spotty and close to full blown dementia. It's a measure of how crazy Congress is that dementia in an elected representatives is offered as a defense for sexism.

brylun said...

Second ex-staffer accuses Conyers of sexual harassment.

MayBee said...

William- and he's the ranking member of the judiciary!

Surely everybody sees now how insane DC is.

MayBee said...

"These cracker-ass women were afraid of Conyers calling them racist."

Yes, I heard yesterday that members of the CBC know very well what it's like to be falsely accused.

brylun said...

In the link above from The Detroit News, the second staff accuser says she reported Conyers to the House Ethics Committee in 2003, and again in 2011. The Ethics Committee has no comment.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

The Ethics Committee has no comment.

Nobody has been expelled from congress since 1862 and that was for treason. The only real solution is their constituents voting them out. And that requires a functional press. And despite all their preening the press is absolutely useless. Of course that requires the constituents to care about the behavior.

Two words. Marion Barry.

Gahrie said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
hombre said...

"The question, of course, is why didn't she or any of the other women in the press corps say it out loud?"

It boils down to a matter of courage and integrity, doesn't it? Far too much to expect from the D.C. press corps, particularly, it would seem, from women claiming to be feminists.

Qwinn said...

Data point 1) Journalists claim to smother these stories so they can have "access" to politicians.

Data point 2) Journalists only smother stories about Democrats.

Conclusion: Journalists don't care about having access to Republican politicians. They know they'll just be printing whatever helps Democrats or hurts Republicans, and don't intend to give the Republican a chance to respond. Access to them isn't necessary.

Drago said...

If I might be so bold as to paraphrase Willie Nelson, All of Inga's Heroes are Sexual Harassers and Enablers.

Michael K said...

"If you can't eat their food and drink their whiskey and fuck their women and still vote against them in the morning, you don't belong here"

Jesse Unruh

virgil xenophon said...

"Two Words: Marion Barry"

Does this mean that Conyers gets his own statue too? :)

virgil xenophon said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
robother said...

Angelo Codevilla's piece last week shed light on the reality of DC political/sexual scene. From his perspective as a chief of staff for a Senator years ago, about a third of Senators at any time are open to sleeping around, and many young women (more on the staff than secretarial positions) are into bagging Senators and other men of power, mainly as a tool of career (and social, in the few who result in marriage) advancement. Boorish behavior by the men is hardly necessary in such an environment and was regarded with contempt by players on both sides.

Ann's egalitarian arguments would still tell against such a system, excluding young men (except in a few cases) and unattractive women from this access. But we should still acknowledge that the system is by and large consensual, and useful to individuals from both sides of the sexual divide.

Sebastian said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sebastian said...

"Two words. Marion Barry." Two more words: Alcee Hastings. And two more: Gerry Studds.

@Qwinn: it would be nice if anyone interviewed vapid Cokie for real. Question: How long have you covered up your knowledge of sexual harassment by Democrats? Question: what other Democrats not currently mentioned have committed sexual harassment? Question: what Republican misconduct have you ever covered up?

virgil xenophon said...

Michael K@9:39am/

As a young AF jo in the mid 60s engaged to a Colonels daughter at Mather AFB in Sacramento who's best friend worked on Unrus' staff, I can ASSURE you that that quote is/was WAY more than a figure of speech.. :)

James K said...

But we should still acknowledge that the system is by and large consensual, and useful to individuals from both sides of the sexual divide.

As it has always and everywhere been, no doubt. But they are making use of taxpayer money for their jollies, so there needs to be a check. In the private sector at least they are using their own (or shareholders') resources.

Angel-Dyne said...

Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?

I suspect a lot of decent men who always treat women with dignity and respect have been aware for some time now that "equality of women in the workplace" has a rather fluid meaning, and that some "champions" of the "equality of women in the workplace" have have no more respect or sense of fairness toward them than the ass-grabbers have for women. Now it's somehow those decent men who are responsible for the behavior of these people?

What are you not understanding about this? Progs have been slandering decent men for decades as "misogynists" and "oppressors". Now the great "champions" of women, those superb egalitarians, whom feminists have been enthusiastically fellating through those same decades, whom feminists have been shielding, toward whose known ultra-sliminess (sometimes attaining to black-letter criminality) feminists have turned a blind eye, because -- what's that word again?...oh yeah, because "equality" -- are being outed. But it's somehow those decent men who are responsible for the behavior of these assholes?

When we hear the likes of Cokie Roberts pipe up in defense of, say, James Damore, maybe "reach for my gun" won't be the first thought lots of decent men have when someone starts lecturing them about "equality".

That I personally despise the grabbers, and would be happy to see the slimy lot of them put in stocks on the National Mall for a national festival of rotten-vegetable throwing (preferably held in summer, so all the school kids can join in, and learn) doesn't prevent me from seeing what else is going on here. Sometimes you really seem to have a blind spot for "the contradictions inherent in [your] system", and the (to others) obvious consequences flowing therefrom.

Angel-Dyne said...

MikeR to rhhardin: "It's not said out loud because the actual human rule is work these things out one on one." Ann answered this very effectively, but - No.

Though it is pretty funny to see rh, who thinks that enduring nations can be run on nothing but adherence to written-down legal abstractions, talk about "actual human rules".

Inga said...

Change is happening and that never goes smoothly. Women who work with or alongside powerful men may not be as intimidated to say no or report sexual misbehavior, assault or harassment. In the past when women reported such things they were often drummed out of their positions by the men in charge, disbelieved or seen as trouble makers. Hopefully we won’t slip back into the toxic silence. Businesses and Government need to make it safer for women to report and to avoid retaliation. A sexual harassment whistleblower law of some sort maybe.

Humperdink said...

Sexual harassment lives in the darkness, with Cokie and her liberal elite nedia buddies keeping the light switch off. Excepting, of course, for the aforementioned Packwood. The light switch was temporarily turned on for him. It's a mystery as to why (sarc alert).

Wilbur said...

William said...
... Conyers is said to be beyond spotty and close to full blown dementia. It's a measure of how crazy Congress is that dementia in an elected representatives is offered as a defense for sexism.

This reminds me of Goebbels' explanation of Rudolf Hess' flight to Britain. It was announced that Hess was insane, having cracked under the strain of his office and duties. This, of course, led to the question of how an insane person could continue to function as Deputy Fuhrer in the regime.

Inga said...

“All of Inga's Heroes are Sexual Harassers and Enablers.”

All of Drago’s heroes are Sexual Assaulters, Trump and Roy Moore who he defends.

Kirk Parker said...

Althouse,

"Notice how much gender inequity there is in everything"

FIFY.

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace...?"

Said equality is an artificial construct, and sure to end badly. Is that enough reason for you? Not every anti-natalist is as unpresentable as Benatar, but there's anti-natalism all around us. Pushing harder and harder against biology is hardly going to make life better for anyone, outside those who make and sell SSRI's and other psych meds.

glenn said...

Cokie Roberts turns out to be just another Dem hack! Who knew? But she has great legs so there’s that.

Inga said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
JPS said...

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?"

What I've done was to treat women in my workplace, to the best of my awareness and ability, exactly as I would men; and, on occasion, to call out a senior colleague who was being a slime toward women he had power over, and be told for my trouble that I was just being a moralizing conservative asshole.

So do please forgive me some grim, not smug, satisfaction as I watch a major shift in what is tolerated, and from whom, and for how long, depending on who stands to gain or lose.

Gk1 said...

Is this really a surprise that the democratic quislings in the press looked the other way when one of their own was sexually harassing women? My only surprise is they are admitting it now. What do they have to gain? It just makes them look like enablers (which they are)

Inga said...

“Sexual harassment lives in the darkness, with Cokie and her liberal elite nedia buddies keeping the light switch off.”

Have conservatives turned the light switch on when it comes to their own sexual harassers? Why are Trump’s and Roy Moore’s accusers disbelieved out of hand? How are you going to stop the harassers on your own side if you keep denying it’s being done by conservative and Republican men too?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

A sexual harassment whistleblower law of some sort maybe.

There is an entire government agency dedicated to attempting to eradicate harassment and discrimination from the work place.

https://www.eeoc.gov//

Another law ain't going to help.

Maybe, just maybe mind you, if the press corp would actually do their job, and expose corruption and wrong doing, no matter what the malefactor's politics, things might get sorted out. What's actually going to happen is that the situation is going to be exploited so as to accrue more power, which will then be abused.

Inga said...

It’s interesting that when the video came out showing Rep.Joe Barton masurbating, it was immediatly said that he was a victim of revenge porn. The woman who released the video says that she was being harassed by him. This was buried very quickly.

Inga said...

“Another law ain't going to help.”

Maybe one with bigger teeth.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Have conservatives turned the light switch on when it comes to their own sexual harassers?

Talk about beside the point. The press is reporting on Roy Moore and Trump. But they aren't, or at least were not for decades, reporting on malefactors on the left, they were in fact, actively shielding them, to the detriment of others. The press was enabling the abuse. So perhaps a little suspicion concerning the motives of the press when they report on Republican politicians is warranted. Perhaps they aren't being completely truthful.

The fact that people were calling out Franken's accuser as a slut who was not respectable on twitter, who purport to be feminist, makes me think its all just a scam. Not falling for it.

Jupiter said...

"Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?"

Um, how about, because I wish there were no useless fucking women in my workplace, I'm sick and tired of listening to them whine about their trivial bullshit little problems, and I think we take them way too seriously already. Does that work for you?

Sebastian said...

"But only male journalists could get the access of riding in the elevator alongside Conyers." If Conyers decided he wanted the male company. Sounds like he didn't.

"Notice how much gender inequity there is in journalism when female journalists have to avoid being alone with a particular politician." They don't have to, and they didn't. Plenty of female journalists traded and trade on their sex appeal. And all these years, no female journalists felt enough solidarity to arrange to ride the elevator with John C with two women present, offering the frisson of an imagined ten-second threesome in exchange for "access"?

"And yet all these female journalists kept a sisterhood of silence, in which they were all held back" Exercising their autonomous agency, as brave challengers of the patriarchy.

And yet it is men who should have heard the sounds of silence and spoken up for the poor dears.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

"Remedies May Include Compensatory & Punitive Damages
Compensatory and punitive damages may be awarded in cases involving intentional discrimination based on a person's race, color, national origin, sex (including pregnancy, gender identity, and sexual orientation), religion, disability, or genetic information.

Compensatory damages pay victims for out-of-pocket expenses caused by the discrimination (such as costs associated with a job search or medical expenses) and compensate them for any emotional harm suffered (such as mental anguish, inconvenience, or loss of enjoyment of life).

Punitive damages may be awarded to punish an employer who has committed an especially malicious or reckless act of discrimination.

Limits On Compensatory & Punitive Damages
There are limits on the amount of compensatory and punitive damages a person can recover. These limits vary depending on the size of the employer:

For employers with 15-100 employees, the limit is $50,000.
For employers with 101-200 employees, the limit is $100,000.
For employers with 201-500 employees, the limit is $200,000.
For employers with more than 500 employees, the limit is $300,000."

https://www.eeoc.gov/employees/remedies.cfm

But guess what, congress usually exempts itself from the laws it passes.

Jupiter said...

If not, how about this; There was a time when work had to get done or everybody starved. Men did that work. Tractors do it now, so a huge number of people have been freed up to do other things, and most of the things they do are, at best, luxuries. The upshot is that work has gotten so God-damned easy that even women can do it, and for some reason beyond my ken they want to. Except that it has to be cleaned up and spruced up and dumbed down and nicey-niced to death or they have a hissy. Stay home! Have baby! Do something you're good at!

Amexpat said...

It's mob hysteria that's saying that every human interaction should be done in public

I would agree that settling things one on one in private is a good principle. But sometimes it takes a mob to bring down a bully. One woman going up against a Harvey Weinstein would stand little chance. But once a group of woman go against a HW then he stands little chance. Of course the rub is getting the first couple to stand up against him in public.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Also, wanking off in front of someone who hasn't consented is a criminal act. Having sexual contact of any kind without their permission is a criminal act. Grabbing someone's ass while having a picture taken is a criminal act. Grabbing someone's breast while they are sleeping is a criminal act.

There is a scene in Bowfinger where a famous actor is caught on film exposing himself to the Laker's cheerleading squad. He is wearing a hood so the cheer leaders don't know who he is. This is used to black mail him into appearing in Bowfinger's movie. In real life I guess they just would have given Bowfinger a five movie development deal.

Inga said...

“Also, wanking off in front of someone who hasn't consented is a criminal act.”

Really? Indecent exposure laws do exist, ya know.

Inga said...

“Indecent exposure laws in most states make it a crime to purposefully display one's genitals in public, causing others to be alarmed or offended. Indecent exposure is often committed for the sexual gratification of the offender or committed to entice a sexual response.”

http://criminal.findlaw.com/criminal-charges/indecent-exposure.html

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Really? Indecent exposure laws do exist, ya know.

Which is exactly what I said. Wanking off in front of someone who hasn't consented is a criminal act. Specifically, it is indecent exposure.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Inga, I did not say what you seem to think I said.

robother said...

Hmmmm. Al Green, Icon-yers, Gutierrez, now Grijalva. Wonder what the over-under is on the percentage Black and Latino Caucii members account for in the $17 million in Congressional harassment settlements?

My guess is they're hitting way above their weight in this category of Congressional action.

Humperdink said...

Inga becomes inquisitive: "Have conservatives turned the light switch on when it comes to their own sexual harassers?"

Oh please, are serious or just trolling? The media sky writes all conservatives when it becomes known to them. The exceptions, of course, are when there is an election on the horizon. In that case, the media holds the dirt until the election is real close. Then it's a full blown release.

Inga said...

“The media sky writes all conservatives when it becomes known to them. The exceptions, of course, are when there is an election on the horizon. In that case, the media holds the dirt until the election is real close. Then it's a full blown release.”

Why aren’t you holding them responsible then? Seems like your ire is directed toward Democrats only. The media sheds light on them and you quickly turn it off while you go looking for Democrats.

Trump and Roy Moore. Why are you ignoring or dismissing the allegations against them?

Inga said...

“inga, I did not say what you seem to think I said.”

You’re right! My apologies.

Unknown said...

For Inga: Why don't Republicans automatically believe Democrat hack press reports against Moore and Trump?

Because Ted Stevens. Remember him? Republican Senator from Alaska? Driven from Congress over a mountain of accusations, gleefully reported by the press.....

and discovered to be 100% false, fake, and made up by said press. They disbarred several attorneys over it. Hey, no big deal though: They got a Republican Senator scalp through lies!

No doubt you fully support such tactics by the media. However, it automatically poisons the well, and no media report accusing Republicans can ever be taken at face value, can it?

--Vance

Ron Winkleheimer said...

What Vance said.

Inga said...

“Because Ted Stevens. Remember him? Republican Senator from Alaska? Driven from Congress over a mountain of accusations, gleefully reported by the press.....”

So every single accuser to come forward in the cases of Trump and Roy Moore are being used by the Press to be a party to lies to bring down a Republican? That’s just lazy thinking.

Unknown said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Quaestor said...

Abby someone wrote: That’s just lazy thinking.

Unintended irony.

Brenda said...

the problem in this sort of situation: as a woman or mother you hear these stories about individual men. But you have no experience or direct knowledge of it yourself. What are you supposed to do when you have no evidence? If it is all just petty gossip and you speak up, you are hurting someone inappropriately. You end up protecting your children, other women around you and yourself as much as possible while trying not to pass on gossip.

Matthew Sablan said...

Vicki Iseman was also a fake sex scandal the press cooked up, while covering for John Edward's actual sex scandal.

I tend to think Moore and Trump did SOMETHING, but given how much of a pass we give politicians and icons like Conyers and Clinton, despite my misgivings about Trump and Moore, I can't fault Republicans for deciding, "eh, the rules say powerful men get to play by different rules, so, whatever," since that's what rules the political battlefield has decided on.

Want to guilt Republicans into acting like Republicans used to act -- remember all the considering if they should dump McCain on the fake Iseman affair story until the NYT coughed up to admit they were wrong?

Have Conyers and Franken quit and have Bill Clinton retire from public life. If the left won't do that, Republicans aren't going to listen to me when I say "we should behave better."

Achilles said...

Inga said...

Trump and Roy Moore. Why are you ignoring or dismissing the allegations against them?

Because many/all of the accusers have been outed as liars. Nelson and Corfman have been caught in several lies and holes in their stories.

There are exactly zero honest allegations against Trump. There is only one specific story and it is a laughable obvious lie about sexual assault on an airplane in the cabin in front of several people.

We dismiss the accusations because we are informed about the story and an intelligent informed person notices that the media has a pattern of lying about republicans and covering for democrats.

Then there is someone like you who voted for a known rapist twice.

Owen said...

When you have a settlement fund with reasonably clear rules about how to tap the fund, you invite abuse. Particularly if the participants are shielded from any disclosure or scrutiny. Why would a Congresscritter object to a "sham claim" by a staffer, that produced a fat $$$ settlement, that was then split between the claimant and the ostensible offender?

We may find that, yes, this process helped shield real predators from public attack and economic punishment.

But we may also find that Congresscritters colluded with complainants to milk the fund for some very nice payoffs?

Cynically wondering here.

Humperdink said...

Inga asked: "Trump and Roy Moore. Why are you ignoring or dismissing the allegations against them?"

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa!. We are just following the guidelines your side imposed on us. If the (political) office is important, ignore their sins, right? Those are the rules the commie pinko dems established. Now you want to change them. Too late.

Of course, we will not go the Nina Burleigh route. We do have some scruples (ha).

MikeP said...

So...

How long has Conyers been doing this? Decades?

How many female staffers, journalists, delivery people, interns, etc have gone through those halls and did not have the advanced warning of "don't get on the elevator with him"? How many victims of workplace harassment by a g*d-d*mn public servant?

Cokie and her ilk enabled that and are responsible for victims who should never have had to deal with that disgrace. They can go to hell.

Fabi said...

O rare, Inga!

Fabi said...

"Cokie and her ilk enabled that and are responsible for victims who should never have had to deal with that disgrace. They can go to hell."

+1

exiledonmainstreet said...

Their job is not to inform us. Their job is to hide the truth from us.

That's been obvious for a while, but it can't be said enough.

Achilles said...

exiledonmainstreet said...
Their job is not to inform us. Their job is to hide the truth from us.

That's been obvious for a while, but it can't be said enough.


The media are a tool owned part and parcel by the truly wealthy. They push the agenda of the aristocracy. It has always been this way.

There job is more to create the truth.

Yancey Ward said...

Two things- Conyers is a Democrat, and Conyers is black. Almost no one in the DC media was going to out him before Ronan Farrow came onto the scene.

DC Democrats are in a true bind here- new revelations of past events are surely going to be heavily weighted against them, and they know it. You can already see them trying desperately to put the toothpaste back into the tube on this, and I don't know that they can.

TBlakely said...

It seems that Victorian morality and code of conduct had something going for it.

Mark said...

Reporters not interested in covering this because they are not Republican. If Conyers would have been a Republican the press would investigate the story for all its worth.

Unknown said...

Inga: what it means is that every report from the media accusing Republicans should always, always be viewed skeptically and examined for truth. Never automatically believe it.

And guess what: Examining the Moore accusations has turned up gigantic holes, retractions, and in other words it's validated the skepticism.

Trump? Well, it's been shown at least one accuser must be lying, because her account cannot possibly be true--it's actually literally impossible. Her story relies on a moving armrest--when said armrest cannot move.

So accusations against Republicans are more often than not complete and utter lies, Inga. Maybe some are true, but no one should believe anything the media comes up with because they are lies said by liars. The truthful ones are the surprises.

--Vance

Assrat said...

>However, it would appear that some politicians and entertainment big wigs got a pass on that, but the rest of us, who neither knew of or could have stopped the behavior should ponder our culpability.

I agree in general with the points you've made here, but I'm inclined to doubt Althouse meant to suggest that people unaware of any misdoing are culpable for anything.

Gahrie said...

Cokie Roberts turns out to be just another Dem hack! Who knew?

I've known for forty years.

Both of her parents were Democratic members of the House of Representatives, her sister was a Democratic politician and her brother was a lobbyist.

Jupiter said...

"One woman going up against a Harvey Weinstein would stand little chance."

Very, very few of the 3+ billion women on Earth ever "went up against" Harvey Weinstein. What you mean is, "One woman trying to get something from Harvey Weinstein without being sexually harassed had better be dog-ugly, but then she probably won't get whatever it was she wanted." Sounds pretty rough when you put it that way. Rough as a cob.

Gretchen said...

I guarantee if it was a white Republican they would have written stories.

rhhardin said...

One woman going up against a Harvey Weinstein would stand little chance.

Settle it one on one. "This is how you have to treat me." You don't have to get him fired or shamed. Nobody else knows.

Tact is supposed to be a feminine strength. Use it.

bgates said...

Notice how much gender inequity there is in journalism when female journalists have to avoid being alone with a particular politician.

The mental category "gay sexual predator" just doesn't exist for you, does it.

rhhardin said...

I don't think people realize the advantage of one on one arrangements.

People vary in what they want and don't want. If every pairing has a negotiated deal then eveybody does as well as can be done.

One rule for everybody drawsl the line in incorrect places for most pairings and so leaves everybody worse off.

The one rule thing is to satisfy feminine resentment at men in general, which is idiotic to do. Forget men in general and look at individuals you know for a while.

virgil xenophon said...

Mike P, Yancy Ward, Fabi and Vance all speak Heap Big Medicine!

rhhardin said...

One rule for all gives you the social equivalent of Soviet Union economics.

Most deals leave one side or the other worse off and so deals don't happen.

Instead, stand in line at the supermarket for your ration of things they don't have any of.

virgil xenophon said...

PS: Being a denizen of New Orlean for many years I've always seen thru Cokies "principled" "above it all" screen to reveal her as the pretentious lefty hack she's always been..

Ron Winkleheimer said...

I agree in general with the points you've made here, but I'm inclined to doubt Althouse meant to suggest that people unaware of any misdoing are culpable for anything.

You are correct. But there does seem to be quite a few attempts to float the "all men are awful" meme elsewhere on the Internet and it bugs me. I haven't sexually harassed or groped anyone. I am repulsed and disgusted by the very idea. And everyone I know is the same. If I became aware that someone behaved in that fashion I would denounce them as cads. But still the attempt to rope me into the same category is going on for ideological reasons and to protect the Democrat party.

Jupiter said...

rhhardin said...

"Settle it one on one. "This is how you have to treat me." You don't have to get him fired or shamed. Nobody else knows."

RH, I don't think you listened to that tape of Harvey in I-am-about-to-fuck-you mode. His switch is in the "On" position. The only way to deal with that guy is to avoid being alone with him. Or maybe whip out your dick and ask him to suck it. Bet that would work.

Assrat said...

>But there does seem to be quite a few attempts to float the "all men are awful" meme elsewhere on the Internet and it bugs me.

That's reasonable. My apologies if I came across as churlish.

Paul from Decatur, GA said...

If you know anything about the political activities of her parents, then her silence is understandable.

walter said...

"Just John being John."


Blogger james james said...
I would not inappropriately touch a woman in an elevator.
But if she is good-looking I would probably look at her ass if she was ahead of me going up the stairs.
--
Safety first. If you bumped her ass with your head, it could cause problems.

Kyzernick said...

"Inga, I did not say what you seem to think I said."

Inga's twilight years came early.

She also was oblivious to the fact that sexual harassment whistleblower protections ALREADY exist.

And now she thinks they just need bigger teeth.

Right, that'll really scare off Democrat Congressmen and Democrat Hollywood Moneychangers. But that's not the point, is it Inga? The point is to appear to be doing something, even when that something will never solve the problem.

Such a tired person, mentally and creatively, this Inga chap is.

Bad Lieutenant said...

rhhardin said...
One rule for all gives you the social equivalent of Soviet Union economics.


Now you're just babbling. It's like you're frightened or something.

You seem to take this really personally, RH. Are you a pig like these people? If you are, it's OK to tell us, nobody here will think worse of you.

From my POV, animals like these have been advantaged at my expense, who IMHO am the opposite of these people. Why should I hesitate to take advantage of a reform that would advantage humans like myself at the expense of animals like HW, Conyers et al?

It would be nice if simultaneously one could sink some barbs into the guilty women as well.

gregq said...

Prof Althouse, you hit the question I want someone to ask Cokie Roberts:

Are there any other Democrat politicians for whom you know anything like "don't get into an elevator with him or her"? Are there any politically Left people in Hollywood, in finance, or in the news business where "everyone knows" that they're an abuser, but it hasn't been published?

If she says "I can't say, because I don't have proof about those people", ask her if she supports deVos's changes to the Obama Admin Title IX rules

Also, point out that we're asking about "public figures", so they can only sue her for "actual malice", not merely being wrong.

Obviously, as she's a Democrat Party hack with a byline, she won't sell out any of her ideological cohorts. But it would be fun to see her twist

rhhardin said...

You already have Soviet Union economics social systems. Men saying to hell with it regarding women.

These aren't the gropers.

rhhardin said...

I held a door for a woman just this morning. She was pretty old so thought nothing of it.

Old rules.

n.n said...

So, this is what the Washington Post intended when they claimed: democracy dies in darkness. It was a projection to redirect the focal point. The women who raised or conspired to raise the veil of privacy to cover for their own indiscretions while in pursuit of wealth, pleasure, leisure, and narcissistic indulgence, are responsible for the women exploited on the coattails of social progress, and the degraded status of friendship with benefits (e.g. "casting couch" relationships).

The tell-tale hearts beat ever louder. Women need to self-moderate, make better Choices, and accept responsibility (for the child, relationship, etc.). And diversitists denial of individual dignity (e.g. institutional racism, sexism) need to be, once again, condemned by better women and men.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Ann Althouse said...The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due. Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now?

Damn fine line there, though. I mean, one has to avoid "white knighting" of course. One must make sure their actions and input is even wanted (as a man)--if you try to be helpful and "champion the equality of women in the workplace" now but do so in what's judged to be the wrong way then you'll be attacked.
Hyperbolic? What if you made a special effort to track and hire qualified women--if you had so many candidates you wanted to help you had "binders full of women" and highlighted that fact...

n.n said...

Women, and men, need to find their religious/moral philosophy. The left's "secular" establishment of Pro-Choice places civilized societies on a progressive slope.

Drago said...

Democrat Grijalva OUT! (after paying off his victims)

Democrat Gutierrez OUT! (I wonder what would make a lefty in a +33 dem district walk away....?....(not I don't!!))

Florida's democrat party chair had to resign because....you already know why.

Inga's pals are beginning to drop like flies.

Unfortunately for the nation, there are literally THOUSANDS of democrat harassers and enablers still in place doing what they do best: winding up their little wind-up toys like Inga!

Looks like that democrat campaign theme of #WarOnWomen is going to need a re-write!

And Franken and Conyers still sitting comfortably in their seats...with not even a single lefty protest demanding they resign.

Precisely as we all predicted.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Anyway it should be noted that the people who loudly proclaim they're working for women/for women's equality sure seem to be overrepresented in the pool of creeps we're learning about now (Franken, Weinstein, various lower-level media people @NPR, Buzzfeed, HuffPo, etc).

Added: the concept of a man "championing" a cause on behalf of women is inherently patriarchal and sexist as defined by the popular feminist Left--I'm almost certain of it.

Inga said...

“Such a tired person, mentally and creatively, this Inga chap is.”

Well we all can’t be as “creative” as you, lol.

Drago said...

rhhardin: "I held a door for a woman just this morning. She was pretty old so thought nothing of it."

Well played. Well played. The insurgency continues....but subtly....

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Angel-Dyne @10:06: right on.

Jupiter said...

Blogger Bad Lieutenant said...
"One rule for all gives you the social equivalent of Soviet Union economics."

"Now you're just babbling. It's like you're frightened or something."

No, he's comparing social relations to economic relations. He's saying that different people are willing to make different deals, and setting a single standard is the equivalent of price-fixing.

But consider this, RH. If the government were willing to enforce a contract in which one person sold themselves into slavery to another, there would be people willing to sign that contract. Pay for an operation for their child, or whatever. Should the government enforce such contracts, willingly entered?

Drago said...

Inga: "Well we all can’t be as “creative” as you, lol"

Well, no one is claiming he is "golden dossier" level "creative".

I mean, some things are so insanely ridiculous only an abject fool would believe them.....oh. Right. Sorry. I didn't mean to bring up uncomfortable memories for you.

So, as subject changer, what is the current Over/Under on how many Democrats and Inga-like democrat enablers will be ensnared in the coming Sexual Harassment Payout Apocalypse?

There can't be many republicans because that all would have come out long ago. And if there is one or two republicans amongst the multitude of democrat harassers you can bet they will be members in good standing in the "LLR" club.

rhhardin said...

Lots of contracts won't be enforced by the courts. Drug deals, for example.

Since the courts won't help, they're usually enforced with gunfire. The theory is that drug dealers learn to pay their bills.

Quaestor said...

Inga's twilight years came early.

I'll get the brain jar ready...

Drago said...

You know, if you want to be a serial sexual harasser, simply become a democrat "ICON".

Those guys get away with everything and you can even have the senior most democrat female in the government go on national TV to defend you!

What a deal!

Drago said...

The only thing missing from the Pelosi/Inga statement re: Conyers was a prolonged standing ovation, like the one all of Inga's hollywood leftist heroes gave to a convicted pedophile/rapist.

Bad Lieutenant said...

rhhardin said...
Lots of contracts won't be enforced by the courts. Drug deals, for example.

Since the courts won't help, they're usually enforced with gunfire. The theory is that drug dealers learn to pay their bills.

11/28/17, 1:50 PM


See, now if somebody had SHOT Harvey Weinstein, instead of hashtagging him, then I'd believe they were really mad.

rhhardin said...

The question would be whether Harvey Weinstein lived up to his deal, not whether he made one.

Were people saying you couldn't trust Harvey or that he was handsy. The latter, I think.

Those were the deals.

rhhardin said...

See, if you're at work, you ought to be able to enjoy dealing with women as women, not as neuter pine boards.

The neuter pine board theory comes from HR.

rhhardin said...

Neuter pine board is the only fair rule, they think. Anyway it deals with the men as men problem that women so resent.

Jupiter said...

"Were people saying you couldn't trust Harvey or that he was handsy. The latter, I think."

One suspects that plenty of people made their deals with Harvey, both sides honored the terms, and were happy with what they got. The people complaining either didn't make a deal, and Harvey tried to collect anyway, or they didn't like his prices but wanted his wares.

Jupiter said...

The question before us, then, is, Should Harvey be allowed to make fucking him (or watching him take a shower) the price of being in his movie? Presumably, if what he had said was "You have to mow my lawn", there'd be no complaint.

rhhardin said...

Well, don't prohibit deals is a good rule. It's how people wind up happy. It's where wealth comes from.

Without different tastes, no wealth can be created.

Jason said...

Althouse: "passing the popcorn and watching" is too passive. The good man doesn't just say I'm good and sit back and watch others get their due. Why didn't you do more in the past to champion the equality of women in the workplace and what can you do now? Don't be smug and don't be sadistic. There is a lot of potential right now to make life better for people. Don't be self-satisfied at sitting on the sidelines spectating.

AYFKM?

After you sat on your hands in 'cruel neutrality' while the baying mob of libtard hyenas came with arson and death threats against Memories Pizza? After you gave Melissa Klein of Sweet Cakes by Melissa a rhetorical kick in front of the subway train when the left targeted her family for absolute, total, utter financial destruction? To include deliberately cutting them off from access to any kind of support by shutting down their GoFundMe accounts?

Hey, if financial prosperity and a good career is important for upper-class women working on Capital Hill it's pretty damn important for nobodies working in a pizzeria or neighborhood bakery, too., or starting these businesses themselves. So don't play the 'muh workplace' card.

You were both smug and sadistic at the time yourself. I've noted more than once in comments here that when it comes to issues regarding gay marriage, you magically shed 30 IQ points. And you know what? You were pretty goddamn smug and sadistic about it.

Statistically, the vast majority of the women staffers and reporters Conyers is likely to have victimized over the last 20 years never voiced a whisper in defense of either of these small businesses. And this was about a lot more than a bit of grabass. Grabass is over in a second. The libs were deliberately destroying livelihoods and college savings in order to make an example of some Christians to intimidate millions of others. And you were cheering them on.

So why do you think you're in a position to insist that we should care more for these women in the halls of Congress who are supposed to be equals to begin with when you couldn't be bothered to raise your voice in the defense of the owners of Memories Pizza and Sweet Cakes By Melissa and their families? Indeed, I recall very clearly that you were rooting for more Christians to expose themselves for destruction.

You of all people are not in a position to lecture the rest of us.

How about you remove that plank in your eye first?

Naut Right said...

Ann: "Being nice and not hurting anyone — it's the arrangement so far and it's been working out quite well for the men."
I bet if you asked a lot of people they would say it has been working out quite well for Cookie Roberts, too. She/we/you understood the quid pro quo, accepted it and used it. That was a concious, free will choice. What changed is the power dynamic. So that puts us suddenly in an ex post facto moment where the men are caught with their pants down.

Howard said...

Why so hysterical, Jaycinda, Mommy got your balls in a box?

Jupiter said...

"Without different tastes, no wealth can be created."

I understand the theory. If people make a deal, it's because both of them are getting something they want more than what they are giving up, so both must be better off.

But the question is whether there are some deals one should not be allowed to propose. And the feminists are saying that men should not be allowed to include sex as part of the package price. Of course, they aren't saying that women shouldn't be allowed to offer sex as part of the package. As usual, as always, they want it both ways.

rhhardin said...

I think the feminists are thinking of men in general in not allowing stuff - putting a stop to it finally, they think - but have a particular man in mind when offering stuff.

It's a context switch.

The cause of the switch is self-entertainment with general resentment.

Jupiter said...

Exactly. The problem is not that they want a rule. The problem is that the rule they want is "I get to have it both ways".

Inga said...

Good for those Tarrant County Republicans. Maybe they know something about it that the rest of us don’t.

“One day after a group of local Republicans met privately with U.S. Rep. Joe Barton about a nude photo of him that ended up online — and his political future — a number of Tarrant County Republicans are calling on the longtime congressman to not seek re-election.

Since Mr. Barton’s highly-publicized issues have come to light, I have talked to numerous Republican activists, leaders, voters and elected officials about this situation — not a single one of them thinks he should run again,” said Tim O’Hare, who heads the Tarrant County Republican Party. “I personally hope he learns from this and tries to be a better father and man.”

Last week, the 68-year-old Barton issued an apology for the sexually explicit photo he took and texted to a woman he was in a consensual relationship with years ago.

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article186846098.html#storylink=cpy

Amadeus 48 said...

Pelosi: John Conyers is an icon.

Merriam-Webster, definition 3. of "icon": an object of uncritical devotion.

That sums up Conyers's career so well!

Drago said...

The New Victorian Inga: "Last week, the 68-year-old Barton issued an apology for the sexually explicit photo he took and texted to a woman he was in a consensual relationship with years ago"

Lets summarize: Joe Barton was in a consensual relationship with a mature woman and the images he sent to his girlfriend were later released online, which could very well be against the law.

Wow!! Yikes!! Thats the Worst Thing Ever!!

Surely worse than democrats paying off their harassment victims!! Or paying law firms to hire ex-intelligence agents to physically and mentally harass and threaten the victims of democrat harassment.

Yes indeed, li'l Inga is working hard to carry out the Dem/LLR Chuck narrative of the day.

Drago said...

I'll bet its perfectly safe to ride in an elevator with Joe Barton.

Any random democrat/lefty "male feminist"? Not so much.

Drago said...

BTW, just what is it that Luis Gutierrez is trying to hide?

What was so bad that Luis Gutierrez, out and proud commie and ANOTHER liberal male "feminist", felt the need to rapidly cut and run?

Well, we know at least one person on this blog who doesn't want to know. Well, her and her pal, Chuck.

rwnutjob said...


If only Cokie had a forum in which she could make this information public

Amadeus 48 said...

Inga, Inga, Inga Ba-binga (as JFK used to call his Nazi girlfriend).

What are we going to do with you? So many tired tricks to change the subject. So many Soros-generated non-scandals. Is the pay good? It must be nice to work from home.

It is good to see you back in costume. Can't you photo-shop a pussy hat on that icon?

FullMoon said...

Inga said... [hush]​[hide comment]

Good for those Tarrant County Republicans. Maybe they know something about it that the rest of us don’t.


Just yesterday you said you , a woman, liked the appearance of an erect penis. Today you are offended that a guy sent his girlfriend a pic of his boner.

Michael K said...

BTW, just what is it that Luis Gutierrez is trying to hide?

He may be going to run for Mayor. Chicago deserves him.

Maybe he has heard rumors about Rahm. He announced a week before the filing deadline for his Congress seat.

Maybe the next shoe to drop with be Emmanuel

Fred Drinkwater said...

Add another. CA Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra designed one week after seven women made accusations.
Head graph did not mention party. How about that.
(Of course, CA is effectively a one-party state.)

Fred Drinkwater said...

Designed what? You may well ask...
(Autocorrect and a balky comment db, apparently.)

Inga said...

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/politics/kentucky-sexual-harassment-scandal/index.html

“On Sunday, Kentucky's House Speaker Jeff Hoover (R) resigned his leadership post under pressure -- following revelations that he and several other legislators had settled a sexual harassment complaint with a woman. I reached out to Joe Gerth, a longtime political reporter and columnist for the Louisville Courier Journal, for some perspective on how the story is playing out in the state and where it might go from here. Our conversation, conducted via email and lightly edited for flow, is below.”


http://www.kunc.org/post/colorado-senators-baumgardner-and-tate-named-allegations-sexual-harassment

“New claims of sexual harassment have been brought up at the Colorado legislature involving Sens. Randy Baumgardner-R and Jack Tate-R. Both, in comments to us, strongly deny any wrongdoing, although they refused to answer our specific questions directly.”

Drago said...

"Maybe he has heard rumors about Rahm. He announced a week before the filing deadline for his Congress seat."

That does not explain the bizarre filing/unfiling behavior.

Inga said...

https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2017/11/03/six-women-accuse-florida-senate-budget-chair-of-groping-sexual-harassment-115479

“TALLAHASSEE — Six women who work in Florida’s Capitol say the state Senate’s powerful budget chairman, Republican gubernatorial candidate Jack Latvala, has inappropriately touched them without their consent or uttered demeaning remarks about their bodies.”

Inga said...

https://www.minnpost.com/politics-policy/2017/11/amid-sexual-harassment-allegations-sen-dan-schoen-and-rep-tony-cornish-resig

“In a statement, Republican Rep. Tony Cornish said he plans to step down on Dec. 1 after serving eight terms in the House. He was facing an outside investigation into allegations that he propositioned lobbyist Sarah Walker for sex more than 40 times.”

Inga said...

“Arizona
Earlier this week, Rep. Michelle Ugenti-Rita, who previously said she was harassed in the state capitol, came forward and named the man. Rep. Don Shooter-R, she told a local TV station, has harassed her for years, inviting her to his room, professing his love for her, and commenting on her breasts. That opened the floodgates. By the end of Wednesday, two other lawmakers and a lobbyist had come forward with their own accusations against Shooter. The Yuma lawmaker, who is known “around the state capitol as a politically incorrect, booze-loving jokester,” denies the charges.”

Ohio
In late October, Ohio senator Cliff Hite-R, resigned after a legislative employee complained about his relentless pursuit of sex with her. He had needs, he reportedly told her, including oral sex. When she rejected him, he asked again. And when she complained, he was forced to resign. Now leaders in the state legislature want to institute sexual-harassment training, but female lawmakers are saying that’s not enough. “If we want to end harassment, we must work to close gaps in gender equality, increase the number of women in the legislature and in leadership roles, and continue to convey that we have zero tolerance for harassment in our legislature,” Sen. Charleta Tavares wrote in a letter signed by 34 other women.”

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/11/sexual-harassment-scandals-rock-state-capitals.html

Drago said...

Oh look. Inga has emerged out of her funk to once again Take Harassment Seriously!
Not enough to hold democrats accountable, naturally.

Not to worry, as soon as more democrats are expiaed Inga will return to her blessed slumber.

Btw, what are the odds that Inga is physically unable to post a single link from any story where a democrat is accused of harassment? Maybe there is a filter for her "interwebs" that "protects" her against stories that might be "triggering"?

Drago said...

If you want to understand why so many lefty dem males KNOW they can get away with whatever they want, you dont have to look any further than the behavior of Pelosi, Inga et al.

If I can paraprase Paul Simon: Inga and Pelisi, Still Enabling After All These Years...

Matthew Sablan said...

If Barton, a victim of revenge porn, loses his seat, and Franken and Conyers walk, even I might start thinking "Who cares what Roy Moore did?"

exhelodrvr1 said...

Obviously she didn't mean he was an icon icon!!

etbass said...

The national media is doing all it can to destroy Roy Moore and so guarantees that his support among the voters in Alabama will be all that greater.

FIDO said...

Inga


We don't care about our sexual harassers anymore.

Why?

Conyers
Ted Kennedy
Bill Clinton
Al Franken.


Your side has not cared for DECADES and yet you have tried to use traditional morality against us to bring down ONLY our malefactors.

Well, you never cared for DECADES so now, we have decided to not care any Moore. Politics and Power now Trumps character, another thing you didn't give a shit about for DECADES.

So that little game you played is OVER.

BUT...while our side has become inured to our imperfect pols...your hypersensitive, hysterical XX brigade has started FINALLY after DECADES of covering for your Roman Polanskis, your Clintons, your gropers, have had enough and now YOU are subject to rules that you ignored.

This is Karma. I could give a damn about some groping or kissing. Show me a CRIME and PROVE the CRIME, IN COURT, and then I will remove that person.

However, when it comes to your side, your sanctimonious braying about what men should be will be held to you.

So either your men will break or your Feminists will break. Either way, win for me. I am sure the Black and Hispanic coalition will do JUST FINE in that kind of hypercharged atmosphere.

Good times.

FIDO said...

I remember one egregious example of media covering.

Tim Russert, one of the absolute best journalists on Meet the Press, had two Republicans and two Dems on board about the Monica Lewinsky thing.

So he started with the Republicans. "Don't you think you are overreaching?" Fair question. Hard question. That is what he did.

So I am revving up and getting ready for when he laid into the Dems. Would he really press them to throw Clinton out? Would he discuss what kind of moral nightmare the Democrat party is? Maybe he would bring up the LONG PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR.

I am practically drooling.

So his question to the Dems: 'Don't you think that the Republicans are overreaching here?"

Blink blink. The Narrative demanded Bill Clinton be saved...and Tim Russert was going to do his damndest to make that happen.

Sad. I lost a lot of respect for him that day that I remember it graphically even decades later.

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 207   Newer› Newest»