[Vision2020] Revisionist Workplace rules: Sexual harassment=sex
Tom Hansen
thansen@moscow.com
Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:52:37 -0700
For some reason the names Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill seem to fit this
discussion.
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
> -----Original Message-----
> From: vision2020-admin@moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-admin@moscow.com]On
> Behalf Of Tim Lohrmann
> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:22 PM
> To: Ted Moffett
> Cc: vision2020@moscow.com
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Revisionist Workplace rules: Sexual
> harassment=sex
>
>
> Ted,
> Your response illustrates perfectly what I'm
> talking about and why I brought this up in the first
> place.
> The Democrats claim to be feminists, are supported
> wholeheartedly by most feminist groups, and quite
> frankly without strong support from women's groups
> they would not be competitive nationally.
> That's fine. However, when their values---here the
> right of a woman in a subordinate employment role
> alleging that she has been subjected to sexual demands
> from a male who is her vast superior in the workplace
> chain command(the classic sexual harassment
> scenario)to have her claim taken seriously and fully
> litigated--conflict with their own political
> interests, the Democrats don't support it. And
> further, they subject the female plaintiff to
> name-calling such as Carville's classist "trailer park
> trash" comment.
> Of course I don't know what actually happened.
> I just brought it up to point out this complete lack
> of principle and consistency.
> TL
>
>
> --- Ted Moffett <ted_moffett@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Tim et. al.
> >
> > You speak as though you know with certainty what
> > happened between Clinton
> > and Paula Jones. Why?
> > Did you see a video tape, or hear an audio tape, of
> > the incident? Do you
> > know of any source that does have video or audio
> > tapes of the incident?
> >
> > Did you consult a psychic?
> >
> > Paula Jones did have motivation to embellish her
> > story. And Clinton
> > certainly had motivation to lie if he did truly
> > harass Paula Jones. I don't
> > think either individual is a paragon of truth.
> >
> > Your account of the ALLEGED sexual harassment is
> > just a theory, one
> > interpretation, though often repeated in the media.
> >
> > As we slide down the proverbial slippery muddy slope
> > of civil rights
> > erosion, the ease with which people, based on
> > repetitions of a story
> > alleging unlawful conduct, fueled by powerful
> > emotions of bias, come to
> > believe such allegations are fact, without
> > sufficient evidence, just makes
> > the slope even steeper and muddier.
> >
> > Ted
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: Tim Lohrmann <timlohr@yahoo.com>
> > >To: vision2020@moscow.com
> > >Subject: [Vision2020] Revisionist Workplace rules:
> > Sexual harassment=sex
> > >Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 11:20:28 -0700 (PDT)
> > >
> > >Visionaries,
> > > It's amazing really. Almost everyone who
> > >commented on my posts are in such denial that their
> > >blow dried slick willie could have been not exactly
> > >respectful of women.
> > > Bob Hoffman's and Joan Opyr's last posts were
> > good
> > >examples.
> > > So for one last time, Folks, when Bill
> > committed
> > >perjury, he was NOT LYING ABOUT SEX or being a
> > serial
> > >adulterer he was lying in a deposition after he had
> > >been named as the defendant in a SEXUAL HARASSMENT
> > >SUIT. If you consider alleged sexual harassment(in
> > >this case the chief exec. officer of a state
> > sending
> > >Ark State Troopers out to summon a young woman who
> > was
> > >in the employ of that state up to his room and
> > >exposing himself demanding sexual gratification) as
> > >comparable to just another sexual encounter then
> > your
> > >views on rights of women in the workplace may come
> > >from the nineties--but the nineties of the last
> > >century.
> > > That's why I brought this up. To point out the
> > >complete lack of principle in both parties. And how
> > it
> > >is often transferred to the knee-jerk defenders of
> > >them. IF a GOP Pres. had been named in a sexual
> > >harassment suit the supposedly feminist minded
> > >Democrat party and their feminist allies would have
> > >been enraged and sputtering into any available
> > >microphone about what a pig he was.
> > > BUT since he was who he was--linked to their
> > own
> > >political futures--heard next to nothing from the
> > >demos and the feminists. Just as on this list, they
> > >said it was JUST ABOUT SEX.
> > > Principles in present day two party politics?
> > As an
> > >elderly neighbor of mine used to "they ain't got
> > >na'arn!"
> > > Later, TL
> > >
> > >__________________________________
> > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> > >http://sbc.yahoo.com
> > >
> >
> >_____________________________________________________
> > > List services made available by First Step
> > Internet,
> > > serving the communities of the Palouse since
> > 1994.
> > > http://www.fsr.net
> > > mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> >
> >/////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> >
> >
> _________________________________________________________________
> > MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months
> > FREE*.
> > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
> http://sbc.yahoo.com
>
> _____________________________________________________
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>