Hopefully he’ll go blind like Bill Cosby
So this has been an interesting discussion, I’m glad we had it
Me too.
Just another example of why I love the Dope, and why I sometimes tend to drag out discussions past the point that some think they’re productive.
Speaking of which, why do you have 2 i’s in front of your name and 4 i’s behind it?
I related the exciting story in this post.
I’m going to retain my initial interpretation of “guy named Andy who’s falling off a cliff.”
Roman pillars…
Well, he’s gone:
Unfortunate story about woman who was an event planner for Fox who set up one on one meetings between Ailes and various women. As always, these are not allegations made under oath, nor subjected to legal scrutiny: [INDENT][INDENT] This is the account of a woman who chose to go along with what Roger Ailes wanted — because he was powerful, because she thought he could help her advance her career, because she was professionally adrift and emotionally unmoored.
Doing so helped Luhn’s career for a time — at her peak, she earned $250,000 a year as an event planner at Fox while, according to both her own account and four confirming sources, enjoying Ailes’s protection within the company. But the arrangement required her to do many things she is now horrified by, including luring young female Fox employees into one-on-one situations with Ailes that Luhn knew could result in harassment. “He’s a predator,” she told me. In recent years, Luhn had a series of mental breakdowns that she attributes to the stress of her situation, and was even hospitalized for a time. [/INDENT][/INDENT] Josh Marshall noted that sexual predators tend to focus on the vulnerable and powerless. The fact that Ailes targeted someone as high profile as Gretchen Carlson suggests but does not prove that less powerful women were vulnerable to sexual harassment. Today Marshall tweets, “Cornerstone of modern GOP, petri dish that spawned Trumpism, was fly trap for sexual predation.”
A sad story: Ailes apparently got off on being mean as I interpret this report. By way of pre-emption I think the alleged sexual harassment victim would agree that she did not act honorably when she arranged meetings with other potential victims (otherwise she wouldn’t feel guilty): Fmr. Fox Booker: Harassed by Ailes for 20 Years -- NYMag
NYT: Things are frosty on the Fox News set. Bret Hume and Megyn Kelly aren’t speaking to each other during commercials. [INDENT][INDENT] …employees say there is a continuing split inside the network, with one camp of old-guard Fox News loyalists — some of whom owe their careers to Mr. Ailes — upset at his ouster. Some are resentful toward Ms. Kelly for cooperating with lawyers brought in by the network’s parent company, 21st Century Fox, to investigate Mr. Ailes’s behavior. (About a dozen women have reported improper behavior by Mr. Ailes to investigators.)
Another contingent inside Fox News is equally dismayed by the responses of stars like Kimberly Guilfoyle, Greta Van Susteren and Jeanine Pirro, who were quick to publicly defend Mr. Ailes after he was accused of harassment in a suit filed by the former anchor Gretchen Carlson.
Ms. Kelly has told colleagues that she was disappointed with those who stepped forward to vouch for Mr. Ailes before knowing the full extent of the allegations against him. Some of her colleagues have also spoken out, including the Fox contributor Kirsten Powers and the meteorologist Janice Dean, who praised Ms. Kelly on Facebook, writing: “Strong women stand up for themselves. Stronger women stand up for others.” [/INDENT][/INDENT] Men too. A Stony Silence at Fox News After Ailes’s Departure - The New York Times
The resentment against Megyn Kelly is fascinating. Perhaps Ailes’ allies were hoping that she would lie to internal investigators representing the Murdochs and Fox shareholders. Or maybe they thought that Kelly should just stay silent about what happened to her, the demands and sexual offers Ailes made. Do they believe that untruths are wrong? Or maybe they think that Ailes treated Kelly acceptably, all things considered: after all Ms. Kelly has done quite well at Fox. As for the lower paid women who had to rush out rooms when Jabba pawed at them, maybe they are just free parties to a transaction of sorts, one that some turned down and some didn’t. Presumably those who resent Ms. Kelly think that Ailes would be treated unfairly if his actions were known to management, at least according to their moral standards.
Nah. It’s probably a lot simpler. Ailes is part of my tribe. You hurt Ailes. Me no like you. And the truth is either a joke, a sanctimonious catchphrase that nobody they know cares about, or something that can go fuck itself. Never mind the practice of favoring female employees on the company’s dime who provide you with sexual favors, after being explicitly pressured to do so. Not sure.
Isn’t this pretty much routine any time a woman speaks up about sexual harassment or sexual assault?
I’m not sure. I’ll note that Megyn Kelly has not spoken up on the subject: she has maintained radio silence as far as the media is concerned. But she has cooperated with investigators hired by News Corp.
Is it typical for victims of sexual assault to be expected to lie to law enforcement or not press charges? I mean sure, their domestic partner might want that. Maybe the domestic partner’s relatives as well. But we’re discussing behaviors among folks that are neither married nor significant others.
Is this sort of thing routine? Thinking it over, this might indeed be an aspect of not taking sexual harassment and abuse seriously. All the same, if they are expecting a lawyer like Megyn Kelly to lie to investigators, that’s a bit much. Then again, she was criticized for not vocally propping Ailes up despite her public reports of sexual harassment in “The industry”.
This is an anecdote but I worked for a company that had a (successful) sexual harassment lawsuit lodged by an employee. I was not part of the lawsuit but I worked in the same department and we were all brought into HR to document what we observed. And we were all heavily “encouraged” to downplay what we observed or to lie. I was the only woman and I believe I received even more pressure than my peers.
I don’t think it is unusual for sexual harassment to be viewed as not that big of a deal (or even for it to go unnoticed) by a lot of people. And some of those people also indirectly benefit from the workplace environment so there is a vested interest in preserving it.
I would have started a new job search later that same day. As people here have said before, HR is there to protect the company and not the employees.
I would have started recording it and offering it to the prosecutor.
Felony witness tampering.
If this was directed at me, there wasn’t anything overt. I would state that I witnessed something and the response would be along the lines of “Isn’t it possible that you misinterpreted it?” or “Are you sure you saw the entire exchange?” or “He is a very busy man and you don’t see all of his interactions; isn’t is possible that he treats everyone the same way?” and (the kicker) “Men interact differently than women. You probably just didn’t understand how he was interacting with you and are too sensitive:rolleyes:” The tone through all of it was completely condescending and smarmy.
It was an ugly, ugly situation and it was during a bad recession. I did look for a job but I know that my statements affected my job search. I’m just saying that a bad company culture (e.g Jian Ghomeshi etc) can seem completely surreal from a rational perspective outside the company.
This is also an anecdote but I worked for a company in which there was not a sexual harassment lawsuit (at least not in our office) but a supervisor big-shot left a sort-of obscene message on the VM of a woman in the office (in the aftermath of an exchange at the company picnic). He was immediately sacked, “immediately” meaning within a couple of days from the incident.
Roger Ailes is the luckiest man alive. If it wasn’t for Trump’s increasingly erratic behavior the front pages would be about the Fox News magnate’s longstanding odious behavior. Currently Gabriel Sherman of New York Magazine is the go-to journalist reporting on women who have been sexually harassed by Ailes in the past.
Roundup page:
h/t A Krugman tweet and Amy Davidson of the New Yorker.
Yes, but since Eric Trump stuck his foot into the topic, they are now linked. And then Trump spout his mouth off about it - women have a “choice” - yeah, they have a choice - speak up and risk ending up without a way to feed themselves, blackballed from their profession - or submit.
She could get lucky - he could leave evidence and HR could sack him immediately. But most harassers aren’t that stoopid. Their public comments are such that they might make you and others uncomfortable - but they “are just a joke” or “I thought it was a compliment” if there is a complaint. And there is still a “boys will be boys,” “what did she expect wearing a tight turtleneck to work with a rack like that” and taking care of ones own - which in most companies means men taking care of men, and management taking care of managers - working against her.
Ivanka has a choice because she is rich. Her ability to pay her rent and feed herself will never be dependent on putting her mouth on her boss’ cock. It has nothing to do with how “strong” she is. Most women in the United States are not nearly so fortunate - if their boss demands sexual favors, they have a hard choice to make. And if he does it behind closed doors - there is no guarantee they won’t end up with anything than on the street.
My former accountant once had a client who was a woman who got $300k out of a sexual harassment lawsuit. Her attorney and court fees got most of that. When she was done with her successful suit, she could not get a job in her industry, she’d been out of work for years, and she had $30k worth of settlement.
To be fair to Ivanka, she did not support the claims of either of the male Trumps. She did not rebuke or refute them, but she acknowledged that companies should not permit it.
Yes, and I didn’t mean to imply otherwise. Ivanka possibly has a clue that her father and brother don’t have. And I don’t want to cast doubt on her being a “strong woman” either. She was just held up by them as someone who wouldn’t be victimized by harassment because she was “strong.” And it isn’t whether she is strong or not - its whether she can afford to stand up to it - not just financially, but career wise.