True. But to be fair it’s a pretty rare human being who doesn’t deserve at least one gratuitous punch in the face. Even babies. *Especially *babies.
Yes and the cases are easily found.
It may not happen often but it happens.
In any case the point of the statement is just a “That’s your story? Well we’ll be seeing you in court.”
You have just proven yourself no better than Fox News itself. You’re ever bit as bad as they are. Go fuck a chainsaw.
Just to clarify, Carlson has not sued Fox: [INDENT][INDENT][INDENT]Currently, the lawsuit, which alleges the Ailes violated NYC’s Human Rights Law, is only against Ailes. Smith said that Carlson’s only “beef” is with Ailes, but they would consider adding Fox News to the lawsuit if they stand by him. Gretchen Carlson's Lawyers Challenge Roger Ailes To Deny Sexual Harassment Allegations Under Oath - Gothamist
[/INDENT][/INDENT][/INDENT]
Separately, I was not aware that perjury prosecution based on civil cases was a rare event. Also, I thought the implication was that the lawyer was hinting that Carlson might have had access to a working recorder. They fit inside pens you know. Even if she didn’t record Ailes, I suspect that public claim would at least play with the rotund one’s head.
The song I’m hearing is less well known but fits the situation well - I’m hearing the Alan Parsons Project sing “You lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.”
She had signed a contract that agreed that any employment disputes must be settled by arbitration. Sueing Fox directly would violate that and Ailes’ team argues that sueing him does as well.
How am I as bad as they are?
Note she is now 50 years old. Obviously I have a different view that most of you but I don’t see 50 year olds as successful bimbos. At that age her sex appeal is going down rapidly. Thus her shift to less appealing slots, her declining salary and finally the failure to renew the contract are very easily explained by her declining sex appeal and consequent ratings decline.
She’s lucky to be 50 today. In 1950 and 1962, successful 50-year-old women were hideous, soulless monsters.
See Sunset Boulevard and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane.
You literally just blamed a harassment victim for the harassment against her. You said it was entirely her fault. Not even partly the fault of those who harassed her.
It doesn’t matter how “innocent” she is. She is not at fault because others sexually harassed her. It doesn’t become okay because she was a part of Fox News.
Hell, I’m not sure even Fox News would be that blatant, if only because it would work against them so horribly.
More women speak out about Ailes.
well that’s easy
you can have any job you want, doesn’t make sexual harassment okay.
If you’re a pornstar or a hooker, its still not ok for the director or your pimp to fondle you
Stop digging? Why, because he’s fucking burying you? YogSothoth’s reaction is precisely why so much sexual harassment goes undereported: because women know there’s a good chance they’ll run into someone like Yog. And they know there’ll be someone like you around defending him. You’re both as much a part of this problem as Roger Ailes, even if you’ve never laid an untoward hand on a woman.
They had to age Gloria Swanson because she was still too hot.
Yup, could not agree more.
We have well known leftist film makers who are actually child molesters, we have right wing priests/football coaches who are child molesters.
We have right wing douche bags who sexually harass women in media, and we have left wing douche bags who do it.
Honestly, when you think about it, “sexiness” is required by almost every media outlet when it comes to women. It opens a lot of women up to harassment IMHO.
I think Fox News’ tendency to hire the not-so-bold and the beautiful is much more pronounced than in the rest of the TV industry.
I’ve had similar thoughts: I think her declining beauty drove her recent career trajectory. I also think that made her vulnerable to sexual extortion by Ailes, if that indeed is what he did.
More legal stuff (and thanks DSeid). The NYT reported today that Carlson is angling more towards suing for retaliation than discrimination. The former is easier to sue for. This is part of a wider legal trend: sometimes discrimination claims get thrown out of court, but the plaintiff wins when they document that they were retaliated against for complaining about sexual discrimination. I speculate that the Ducey complaint plays that role. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/09/business/gretchen-carlson-suit-aims-at-retaliation-over-discrimination.html
I remind myself that lawsuits with beneficial social consequences on net don’t always have wholly sympathetic plaintiffs. Not everyone is as savvy as Megan Kelly. And if the allegations in the Politico article are accurate, Ailes needs to be taken down by the law, civil or otherwise.
I don’t agree with everything that Yog wrote and I think he was unduly harsh on Carlson and unfair in making this out to be typical of conservatives, but the above criticism is also very unfair. I think several of us are just talking past each other.
For example I immediately got flak just for saying the following “if you go down into the sewer, expect to encounter sewage and sewer rats. Of course Gretchen is justified in her complaint, if the facts are accurate. It’s just that she may have been a bit naive in thinking of Fox News as a normal broadcaster, or an environment with normal ethical standards.”
The first statement is true and the second one suggests – correctly, I believe – that joining Fox isn’t a very creditable career move for a serious journalist who is apparently a talented Stanford graduate. The question of “blame” is nowhere to be found, and talking about “blame” is completely misguided in any context except that Ailes and Doocy are 100% to blame for their actions.
Yog did state that Carlson was to blame and I completely disagree with this. But what he wrote about Fox, minus the harshness and blame of conservatives, is basically correct. Fox News is a cesspool of liars and unethical jackasses – that’s just a fact. Stating that fact doesn’t make one a misogynist or dangerous woman-abuser nor does it in any way defend the actions of the pieces of shit that work there. Speaking for myself, such an accusation is laughable since I’m about as supportive of feminist issues and women’s rights as it’s possible to be. Which is exactly why I think the whole Fox environment is so reprehensible. Reading any indication of “blaming the victim” in anything I said is just grossly misinterpreting my meaning, plain and simple. You can devise all the clever arguments you want, but please don’t try to tell me what I believe.
Actually, the question of blame is right there, in your second paragraph, when you say, “if you go down into the sewer, expect to encounter sewage and sewer rats.” That’s textbook victim blaming. I can appreciate that you don’t want to admit to this, because it’s tantamount to admitting that you’re a fundamentally shitty person.
But that’s what it is.
And that’s what you are.
I clearly stated that Ailes and Doocy are 100% to blame for their actions, and I absolutely believe it. So what percentage of the blame is left to assign to Carlson? Work on the math and get back to me.
You can call me a shitty person if you want, but I think an actual shitty person is one who makes unfounded assumptions about someone else’s beliefs based on their own misreadings and delusions.
What the fuck is one supposed to say about a career decision to leave CBS and join Fox? That it was smart? Or is one supposed to very carefully avoid mentioning it, in case it’s misconstrued by someone subject to delusions that it’s “blaming the victim”? If Carlson was someone I knew and she had asked my advice about going to Fox, I would have strongly advised her against it, and cited their general lack of ethics and the way they treat women as the main reason. Yeah, that makes me a shitty person, and a misogynist, too! :rolleyes:
Blame is not a zero-sum game. We know this, because we’ve see you, in this thread, blaming the victim of sexual harrassment for her own harassment.
How about, “Leave it out, because it’s entirely irrelevant.” The position you, and that shit head Yog-Sothoth, have staked out is functionally identical to, “Of course she got raped, look what she was wearing!”
No, that would be good advice. What makes you a shitty person, and a misogynist, is that when they ignore your advice, and something bad happens, your first reaction is, “Well, that’s what you get.”